Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
General Discussion / Re: The "Storm Area 51" memes
« Last post by superdave on Today at 10:52:10 AM »
i think the venn diagram of people who really believe their are secret aliens in Area 51 and people who would do something really stupid, has a lot of overlap.
General Discussion / Re: The "Storm Area 51" memes
« Last post by Awatsjr on Today at 10:46:00 AM »
Especially when they find they can’t back up either. But I seriously doubt anything more that a hundred people would try this (if that) and then only half heartedly. Most of these people are just messing around.

Hopefully no one does get hurt for a fantasy.
Also except political parties don't make canvassing a condition of membership.
Simulacra and Simulation Stages:

[1] It is the reflection of a basic reality
[2] It masks and perverts a basic reality
[3] It masks the absence of a basic reality
[4] It bears no relation to any reality whatsoever: it is its own pure simulacrum.

Today in our civilization, less than 3% of people are capable of realistically creating Stage 2 Simulacra. After this technology, over just one or two years, 4 Billion people will be able to create Stage 3 Simulacra... and that will permanently weaken our perception of reality by many orders of magnitude.

All of that could be also said about politics.  Except canvasing has a much better success rate.
Second: who's going to stop Russian and Chinese hackers from accessing the technology illegally? We can't even stop spammers and scammers - this technology is no different.
Society is not ready for constant spam calls.  The technology used must be terminated.
totally desensitized.
It's scary because I was in HS at the time of Columbine, if school shootings have lost the shock value to my generation, it's pretty much gone for most people.
there's no right answer here.  Religious differences certainly make a relationship difficult but whether they should be the end depends very highly on the individuals and the nature of their relationship.
The time to react like this, if there ever was one, which there wasn't, would have been 25 years ago when CGI started becoming more photorealistic.

You are completely missing the two crucial points I've explained. The costs of time and expertise required by traditional CGI are multiple orders of magnitude behind. I'm not exaggerating... in terms of potential output to the internet, we are literally talking about an potential increase in faked content in the orders of 100 MILLION times more than any previous CGI, Photoshop or any other non AI technology.

I will provide a more concrete example to you. Imagine the number of people you encounter every month... at work, university, your family, your friends, at the shopping malls... If I asked you to find to me how many of them are actually capable of mixing in a photo-realistic way two faces in Photoshop, to the point of quasi-perfection... how many of them would be able to? 1% maybe? And how many hours will they spend on crafting this? Now... With this technology, how many of them would be able to achieve the same task? Again, in Garry Oldmans voice: EVERYONE. You could literally gather a team with 100 Photoshop experts and given the task of creating the maximum number of fake realistic faces as possible... at the same time, give this new technology to a 3 year old toddler and tell him/her to keep pressing the "Generate X Faces button". The toddler would be able to output realistic fake content literally more than a thousand times more than the team of Photoshop experts.

More people that don't exist, created by AIs.

That's what I am talking about. Oh... Someone mentioned Russia or China on this thread. People are pointing out that an army of bots on twitter and Facebook is already being formed by these fake people. This is just another example of the very destructive, Orwellian powers of this technology, that were completely impossible before AI. What would be the costs for a government to pay professionals to Photoshop 20 million realistic faces? And what is the cost to do the same thing with AI? Like I've said, it's a drop of money and computational resources in the order of more than 100,000 times... This is not incremental. This is a huge step. Hugely disruptive.

For more instantenously GAN AI faces of people that dont exist, go to this website and keep refreshing the page.

This is why any law and general declaration needs to avoid using gendered language (or if it does, it needs to use all versions of gendered language equally), when talking about the desired end result;


It doesn't bring to the front the problems with meat consumption and high fertility rates, or the need for taxing emissions.

Part of section 5 includes making birth control universally available; it is mentioned strictly as a female reproductive rights issue. It doesn't say anything specifically about sustainable population growth or fertility rate.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10