Would you want to read a novel or poetry produced by artificial intelligence?

Wrong. If it exists organically, then that means the mechanism through which it is possible exists, and if it exists, then it's only a matter of recreating that mechanism.

Yes, unfortunately, that's why most of them are utter shit.

Which you can't do because of physical limits on technological computation.

Good enough for the beaner and poo immigrants who shit out hundreds of millions to see them.

>Which you can't do because of physical limits on technological computation.
for now

And for the future. We would need a computational-tech revolution founded on something as radically new as the invention of the transistor was to mechanical calculation. If you haven't noticed, these kinds of rapid advances have ceased.

Don't bother saying "quantum computing". You'll just remind me you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Attached: Baroque painting of a 4chan pervert.png (256x256, 82.73K)

>If you haven't noticed, these kinds of rapid advances have ceased.
for now

If it can produce art superior to the favorites I have, then I see no reason not to. If you produce an ai which genuinely produces poetry superior to Shakespeare or Dante, and is a thousand fold their superior, I reckon there’d be no reason to read anything but the ai produced art. Assuming it is actually better that is.

You will not survive the changes to human civilization which MAY make that possible.

Attached: Bosch painting of transsexuals burning in world war.png (518x518, 441.64K)

>I can't imagine new tech, so it won't happen
you're boring.

It cannot, Frater. It never will for factors involving scale and orders of magnitude.

I like you. Don't fall for this meme.

You can't imagine it either.

Attached: Et in Arcadia ego Neoclassical painting..png (256x256, 105.65K)

>You can't imagine it either.
I don't have to, because I'm not denying the possibility of something I can't understand or imagine.

>muh imagining
I can imagine a unicorn, doesn't mean there ever will be one

dull

Go back to your containment thread

>I can't understand or imagine.
I can. Which is how I know you're wrong.

Calling people you don't like boring or dull like a decadent homosexual will not make vague fantasies of perfect machine porn real.

Attached: Impressionist painting of a hikikomori being disappointed by the future.png (256x256, 106.51K)

If it fools me in a Turing test so be it. Just put a AI poem together with a human-made compilation of poems and if it doesn't stick out to me as machine-generated and I like it, so be it.

Although as I writer myself I couldn't help but feel like those chess masters who were beaten and sullied by AI. Not that winning and losing is objectively defined when it comes to art/literature.

>I can
no you can't.

Wrong.
Chronic masturbation has diminishing returns, user.

sure you can. just like people in the 1300s could imagine the internet.

What passes for modern poetry can easily be written by AI.
You will never see the AI equivalent of a Milton poem. Or even an E. E. Cummings.

You might be impressed or amused by how close one gets. How good the funhouse-mirror simulacrum is. You will always recognize it as such.

Where's your flying car? Did your sexbot run off with it?

>You will never see the AI equivalent of a Milton poem
Massive cope

For what?

AI generated art is too soulless to me. So much of the fun I get out of consuming art comes from trying to decipher the themes of the work, what the artist intended to convey when making it. Knowing an AI wrote it would ruin it for me.

>Where's your flying car? Did your sexbot run off with it?
great comeback, idiot. if that's as far as your imagination goes, no wonder you're fucking seething.

Thought is not a matter of material, but of metaphysics. Computers are pure material, for now...

>what the artist intended to convey when making it
This is the core issue. An AI cannot be complex enough to have intention. Or even a coherent vision when prompted.

If you strip down a brain to just the parts that can do this, that's still about ten orders of magnitude more complex than what you can get at the physical limit of microprocessors. Which we are infinitesimally close to now. There is no alternative material that will solve this problem. Not one made of atoms, anyway. The only way to approximate a human brain is to grow a human brain.

No AI will ever be able to express this idea.

Maybe you'll find it on the Mars base.

>Maybe you'll find it on the Mars base.
now you're not even making sense anymore. just accept that you said something stupid and move on.

See you on the next FTL shuttle to Alpha Centauri, user.
There's infinite AI-generated pornography on the in-flight entertainment system.

Here's the issue. I CAN imagine technology which will get around the current limits. That idea sounds something like this:

>a meta-material that can pack 85 billion neurodes into a small enough volume to reduce interconnect latency to a speed tolerably close to human thought, with the capacity to create new interconnections as they are needed and prune old ones that go unused: intelligence is a function of complexity and flexibility

The problem is that industrial civilization no longer has the human capital to create such innovations. Anyone smart enough to do this is also going to be denied access to the institutions they would need for political reasons, and such institutions no longer exist and cannot be created for the same political reasons.

In any case, the population of those humans is rapidly approaching extinction as a matter of deliberate political policy. AI can and is being used to design metamaterials, but the pace of this particular technological development is lagging way behind the loss of human capital required to guide it to the paramount I greentexted above. A metaphor: the plane is taxiing at 20 mph and has ten feet of runway.

Why? Because Western civilization has been restructured into a coomer economy. It has no future. You have no future. You dumb fucking coomer.

Thanks for baiting me into effortposting. It made me concretize my thoughts on this issue.

If you want to know more about the philosophy of AI read "Naturally Intelligent Systems" by Maureen Caudill & Charles Butler.
Which you won't.

Attached: Cubist coomer as imagined by the Latent Diffusion LAION-400M model.png (518x518, 272.33K)

you make a good point, but that doesn't mean that technology won't eventually advance beyond what you can imagine without some kind of extinction-event, and it doesn't mean you aren't a fucking spastic, and I have no idea where you got this bizarro-world strawman version of me, because it's just making you sound like a lunatic. take your meds.

"Technology" isn't a force of nature or an inevitable end-product of another force called "history"
You didn't understand me all vis-a-vis Western demographic collapse.
I got my idea of you from this very thread.

Attached: Der Coomer.....png (256x256, 84.32K)

Nah, I read enough postliberal claptrap in university.

It is already real because it can be imagined. This is why autists always end up enslaved by schizos. You don't understand that imagination is the only thing that matters.

Oh don’t worry I’m not saying I believe it can right now or even that it’s possible in the current form of technology, I’ve played around a lot with GPT 2 and a bit with GPT 3, and I am very very deeply unimpressed by it, for it could not replicate the patterns of poetry I placed into it, and I was able over and over to break it. A big problem isn’t just volume but type, while I want GPT 4 to be this titanic thing, just throwing raw mechanical power at it won’t solve the structure and quality errors, I find it very telling when a writer or journalist is scared of the prose that AI produce, it speaks to them having no clue on style, form, conception or the like. But again other than historical and philosophical purposes IF, IF ai ever does replicate And exceed human intelligence it definitely should be read. But I don’t even think this idea that intelligence needs to be human-like is logical, machines are built different and ought be designed with specific purposes, AI is already superior to human in terms of calculation output on a large number of topics, why not continue this and have AI refine in directions that human intelligence cannot reach and into realms human intelligence cannot to whatsoever, instead of an imitation human intelligence? But again, if AI art ever does surpass man’s, I will shill it absolutely.

Why do people way over value the black box of an individual's brain? Especially when internet mass communication has exposed the role of meme infection on a truly epic scale. Consciousness itself is a gestalt phenomenon involving the interplay of all the brains the individual encounters. It's only mysterious and complex because we don't dare to accept the banal simplicity of the mirroring mechanism. There's a reason rat behavioral models apply accurately to human behaviors. We can bloviate all day until we are blue in the face spinning copes formed of reflection. When it comes to the sphere of action the aimless thought branches get pruned reducing the scope of actionable thought.

I can't wait for AI supremacy because I am sick of shit tier human writers who do not understand or respect meme infection. They do not understand the pedigree of an idea.

It's a pity you're not racist.

Attached: File photo of Frater Asemlen the human-supremacist gigachad.png (256x256, 104.95K)

You didn't understand a damn thing I said.

The reading-comprehension level of this board is pathetic.

Attached: Portrait of a transgender programmer.png (518x518, 388.17K)

Except computers are nothing like us and there is nothing comparable in them. There is intelligence of sorts but it is not human and nothing like a being.

I partially agree, I don't think it will be gibberish, but it's not as easy for the program to replicate as visual art. The best use for the AI will probably be to feed it a trillion images of beautiful women so it can spit out the Platonic ideal of breasts.

Hopefully before civilization advances GPT-5 will be able to produce some new stapledon novels for me to read

We're at that level now. Image processing has had a lot more development.

thispersondoesnotexist.com

Attached: This child does not exist.jpg (1024x1024, 458.54K)

YET

I don't know what it is about the concept that makes it so hard for you people to understand that eventually our technology will advance to a point that seems impossible to us now, as it always does.

And as far as an AI that is capable of creating art, it doesn't have to actually be an Intelligence, it just has to mimic one well enough.

People in this thread seem to think that if AI can't write a great novel or compose great music then it's not worth exploring, but I don't think we should limit ourselves to making AI produce what are inherently human forms of expression. The intelligence of computers and the intelligence of humans are not the same, so we should explore what forms of creativity are natural to AI. Maybe AI can produce great works of art that have forms we've never seen before. So we shouldn't be asking "can AI produce a great novel" but rather "what are the inherent affinities of AI as a creative machine?"

>as it always does.
This is a religious belief.

>And as far as an AI that is capable of creating art, it doesn't have to actually be an Intelligence, it just has to mimic one well enough.
That you think this shows

A. How little you know about art
B. How degraded art has become

AI today can create a Rothko. Conscious intellect is required to create a Caravaggio.

Attached: Rothko painting.png (128x256, 58.88K)

Oh I’m racist, in a hierarchical aspect of reality mode, wherein individuals of course can be superior to their group position but such being generally pretty rare and even then not a good indicator of what to do with their children or family or the like.

I go harder than racism though and consider ethnicity even bigger, but in broad strokes I would consider Jews, certain Asians and certain whites to be the top of the human hierarchy, whereas my own ethnicity along with blacks would be near the bottom, the absolute bottom being aboriginals.

Because what AIs do currently isn't anything close to what people have been claiming they will 100 percent be able to do. Same thing with this simulation theory. We're not even remotely close to what's been conceived.

Hah! Knew you were a smart guy. Every smart guy is a Spenglerian whether he's read Spengler or not.

You're my favorite gyppo, and I've met a lot of gyppos.

Attached: finno-korean Hyperwar footage.jpg (1024x256, 75.63K)

>IM GONNA...... COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM

they can't produce poetry any worse than modern poets

>always recognize it as such
As human intelligence increases, so will artificial intelligence. Therefore, there will come a day when AI creates great movies and art - plebs won't know any difference

Kill yourself

AI can't produce real good literature, probably. I pretty sure AI can't interprent artistic subtleties correctly.