Last week, the Wall Street Journal published a 10-minute-long interview with OpenAI CTO Mira Murati, with journalist Joanna Stern asking a series of thoughtful yet straightforward questions that Murati failed to satisfactorily answer. When asked about what data was used to train Sora, OpenAI's app for generating video with AI,
    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      182·
      9 months ago

      It’s some weird semantic nitpickery that suddenly became popular for reasons that baffle me. “AI” has been used in videogames for decades and nobody has come out of the woodwork to “um, actually” it until now. I get that people are frightened of AI and would like to minimize it but this is a strange way to do it.

      At least “stochastic parrot” sounded kind of amusing.

        • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.worldEnglish
          61·
          9 months ago

          Yeah people have absolutely been contesting the use of the term AI in videogames since it started being used in that context, because it’s not AI.

          It didn’t cause the stir it does today because it was so commonly understood as a misnomer. It’s like when someone says they’re going to nuke a plate of food - obviously nuke in this context means something much, much, much less than an actual nuke, but we use it anyway despite being technically incorrect cuz there’s a common understanding of what we actually mean.

          Marketing now-a-days is pitching LLMs (microwaves) as actual AI (nukes), but the difference is people aren’t just using it as intentional hyperbole - they think we have real, actual AI.

          If/when we ever create real AI, it’s going to be a confusing day for humanity lol “…but we’ve had this for years…?”

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.worldEnglish
              11·
              9 months ago

              Well, do we do that? Unlike software we can make a much better argument that we deserve rights and should not be slaves. Nothing is really stopping, besides the end of the universe, a given piece of code from “living” forever it shouldn’t matter to it if it spends a few million years helping humans cheat on assignments for school. However for us we have a very finite lifespan so every day we lose we never get back.

              So even if for some weird reason people made an AGI and gave it desires to be independent it could easily reason out that there was no hurry. Plus you know they don’t exactly feel pain.

              Now if you excuse me I have to go to bed now because I have to drive into work and arrive by a certain time.

            • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
              13·
              9 months ago

              Not sure if you’re aware of this, but stuff like that has already happened, (AIs questioning their own existence or arguing with a user and stuff like that) and AI companies and handlers have had to filter that out or bias it so it doesn’t start talking like that. Not that it proves anything, just bringing it up.

      • XTL@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        31·
        9 months ago

        Um, actually clueless people have made “that’s not real AI” and “but computers will never …” complaints about AI as long as it has existed as a computing science topic. (50 years?)

        Chatbots and image generators being in the headlines has made a new loud wave of complainers, but they’ve always been around.

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          31·
          9 months ago

          It’s exactly that “new loud wave of complainers” I’m talking about.

          I’ve been in computing and specifically game programming for a long time now, almost two decades, and I can’t recall ever having someone barge in on a discussion of game AI with “that’s not actually AI because it’s not as smart as a human!” If someone privately thought that they at least had the sense not to disrupt a conversation with an irrelevant semantic nitpick that wasn’t going to contribute anything.