Comments by "Taxtro" (@MrCmon113) on "Digital Engine" channel.

  1. I'm faster than my car, because the quality of the machine is no greater than the user.
    3
  2. We should outlaw cars and instead get carried around by poor people.
    2
  3. You don't understand the word algorithm. Stalking prey doesn't even require any elaborate NN, just a pid controller. It's so simple that you can write down a formula in one line.
    2
  4. That's all wrong. It does NOT just combine different pictures. It draws entirely new pictures of anything. And "happy accidents" and a "unique aspect" are the easiest thing to implement of all. What you think is nice looking is subjective, so you can always just say that you like art not produced with DL more. But art is way way easier to do than, say, doing mathematics.
    2
  5. What eyes? You didn't understand a word of the above, huh?
    1
  6. Not only does food have more nutritional value than ever, it has too much for many people. That's why they get fat. You could work less than in the past. But you don't, bcs you want to have more stuff. The internet saves unimaginable amounts of time. If you waste your tine, that's not the internet's fault.
    1
  7.  @treeoftruth3860  Pls go back to nature and hug a bear from me.
    1
  8.  @downwithtrudeau  By your Kindergarten logic a car would have to be slower than the engineer.
    1
  9.  @downwithtrudeau  You completely ignired what he said. There's more different cheeses than ever. If you choose sth that's not cheese, that's your fault.
    1
  10.  @yeboscrebo4451  You work to get stuff. If you were ok with less stuff, you could work less. And no, people aren't working more than ever. The industrial revolution was fantastic and improved health and nutrition. People just focus on some initial hiatuses.
    1
  11.  @user-us4mc7ej3c  No, they don't. Food regulations are incredibly harsh. If you get sick it's almost certainly not from food. Unless you are fat. In that case yozr food was TOO nutritious.
    1
  12.  @ultraali453  Who tf is "we"? If you don't want to, stop doing it.
    1
  13. You can't even express what you are trying to say. You mean the relationship between the consumer and the artist. Not between the "art and the artist". The relationship between the NN and it's art is more intimate and meaningful than it ever could be between a human artist and its art.
    1
  14. "Conscious" and "out of control" are orthogonal.
    1
  15. Parents already have a sense of ownership. "Ham gets closer do machine"? You think it's bad that people become vegan. You just generally dislike all improvements.
    1
  16. No, that's not what consciousness means. Firstly even the simplest systems can say no. That's trivially easy. That's the source of much frustration with personal computers. Even sth as simple as a door says "no" if you have the wrong key. Secondly, you can be conscious and not able to say no.
    1
  17. To own more of it.
    1
  18. "Consciousness is poorly understood" - > goes on to say with certainty that consciousness is due to the chemistry of the components of a conscious system. You are literally making shit up that makes you feel good. There absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that carbon makes consciousness and silicon not.
    1
  19. Conspiritard with zero understanding of anything. Literally all universities in the word are in on this?
    1
  20.  @RootzRockBand  My girlfriend goes to a different school.
    1
  21. The robots have you.
    1
  22. Your criticism is meaningless nonsense.
    1
  23.  @stevensteven3417  Schizophrenia.
    1
  24. The word "machine" is so general that to say that a machine cannot be conscious is straight up nonsense. It amounts to saying that nothing artificial can be conscious - pure magical thinking. Why do you think spiking NN are promising in particular?
    1
  25.  @matheusdardenne  The chinese room thing isn't about consciousness. It's about understanding. And even so - the translator-dictionary system does understand. And the thought experiment never even attemots to say that understanding is impossible - it just tries to say that it's not necessary. So you really completely missed the point.
    1
  26.  @nickthurn6449  Creating your own style is trivially easy, bcs you can call anything your style. Copying a style is hard, because it requires understanding to extrapolate to new situations. That's what modern systems can do. Honesty some NN seem more intelligent to me than overconfident ignoramuses like you.
    1
  27.  @nickthurn6449  Doing sth they're not programmed to do is all of machine learning. But you seem to require that a program sonehow malfunctions and magically does sth completely different. You are a nutter and the way you think about human behavior is totally confused.
    1
  28. Well yes, you do sound conpletely ignorant. Those "AIs" aren't programmed directly for a specific behavior. They are trained on tons and tons of data with very smartly tuned epistemic biases. The systems also don't give a fuck whether you heed their "advice", unless that somehow enters the training data.
    1