I like the idea of the skits not being funny but the ads are

You think machines will have more empathy?

How... To cause ignition in fusion facilities we need an enormous facility with tools that measure many soccer fields. In what world in the current era do you see it feasible that gathering all the materials needed + starting the process of ignition + capturing enough energy + maintenance = more energy output than energy input. Fusion relies heavily (very heavily) on fossile fuels right now. And it requires a lot of mineral resources that are in a process of rarification.

In what world is it possible to have more energy out than in? Maybe in the far far future but right now?? And even then, maybe you could create one or two functioning facilities in this century in North America or in Europe. Let's say we were to develop a functional energy-producing facility that outputs more usable (for us) energy than it inputs... How do you see the scaling of this as realistic? By then we probably would be in worldwide shortages of fossil fuels (affecting food supplies and everything related to growth) and we would be facing shortages in critical mineral resources...

Unless you tell me that we are gonna have mastery over recycling of minerals (which feels very unrealistic) we are facing a wall with this solution. Like maybe a few cities might have a power grid supported by fusion but I cannot fathom an upcoming world powered by it...

EDIT : grammar

My thoughts exactly. This isn't 1965. No one is getting a job at McDonald's and buying their first car 3 weeks later, or an engagement ring, or a home. Anyone who works at McDonald's is either a kid whose parents can't afford to buy them basic necessities, or it's one of three jobs they have. Or they're a manager who has stuck it out for years, but still hates their fucking life.

>‘Sentience, self-awareness, agency’

Wouldn’t we be better off with a ‘general intelligence’ that was none of those things

There's Diff-SVC. If you haven't heard people using it to make Peppa Pig sing in Japanese

I see, thank you. Exciting times.

You sound like 14 years old. Artists don't eat air and can't pay bills with air.

To become artist can take 10 or more years, and it was never well played job anyway. In the face of competing with AI young artists are just forced to give up.

Diff-SVC? It's open source and can clone to other languages. But it's speech-to-speech only

> We started this about four years ago before OpenAI and SD kinda swept the landscape and are thinking now how to incorporate pieces of those into it.

Elevenlabs can be used for voice cloning and synthesis https://beta.elevenlabs.io/s

SD is being used to create textures directly in blender using the depth map feature of 2.0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzpSj8JOb1c

and you can likely find a prompt for GPT3 to create Seinfeld scripts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1onxri0duN0 (there are some other voice synth tools linked in the description)

It's all funny until they enhance their means of production and dominate all sectors of economy by enhancing them with AI and only thing US will export is Marvel movies.

They had a million in a week and now they are already at 10 million daily users despite being down 50% of the time.

[deleted]

Stabby v1

The approach to absolute abundance of everything makes things cheaper. There are no careers in automated luxury communism, there is only passion to do something because you love doing it.

An artist truly passionate about drawing does not give a fuck about whether their art is converted into cash or views.

What is this negativity?

As artist, I can go outside and draw portraits on the street right now with a pencil and no AI will stop me and my hat will be filled with cash because I am making a direct person to person connection!

I can draw in Photoshop for my clients and get tons of cash because they suck at directing AI really, really bad or simply don't have time for playing with Ais.

I can combine my art skills with an AI to make amazing new things and get cash.

Fear of automation is foolish and is obviously being spread by people who aren't passionate about making art with any tools that exist without limits. I refuse to be boxed into fear mongering and imaginary suffering.

Probably will get far ahead of OpenAI this year - Chinese government heavily support science and research with far less roadblocks.

Right now in the West I see big fight over who gets to profit of the AI development - all of the copyright concerns from different industries, government interference, likes of Elun Shmucks fear mongering and other corporations wanting peace of the cut.

> I've never seen anything like this.

Were you watching VAERS data before? Weird hobby.

Wtf is up with the "onion burger" lmao

ah yes, my bad, thanks

Insanely cool. Thank you for this creation.

Can't people own property in China but not the actual land the buildings are built on and aren't there privately owned business in China listed on the stock exchange? Doesn't really sound like communism to me.

Lol, well that's not really even that close to fully automated then. There's a Dunkin by my house that has an AI taking orders at the Drive Thru. You pull up, tell the AI what you want, and then humans inside make it for you while you're working your way around to the Drive Thru window. The biggest difference here seems to be that they have conveyor belts delivering the food to people at the McDonalds.

[deleted]

Why is bitcoin number 1 by market cap? It's technology is arguably worse than other crypto coins.

Here's the definition of innovation

make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products. "the company's failure to diversify and innovate competitively" introduce (something new, especially a product). "we continue to innovate new products"

By definition, if something is popular, it has to be innovative, people don't just en masse jump on the bandwagon of stuff that's been done for years.

> and the cessation of conscioussness doesn't bug you.

It only matters in a platonic universe. If we do live in a materialistic world then it doesn't matter, because we are a thing which can switch on or off, but we are that thing regardless, if it switches off and then doesn't switch on, only then it is an issue. In fact materialism sidesteps a lot of the platonic/neoplatonic issues (immortality of soul and such ideas).

Only issue with creating copies of yourself (in a materialistic world), yet cease the function of the original is that you lose context, I.e. you do not see the world go on, instead you see it stop at the moment of the original's cessation. You can say that the world goes on in some higher level/sense but that's not at all what you're going to "see". You are going to see/experience the end of all. Which is -btw- why mass suicide has never caught on in most/any society, most people can make said connection in some subconcious level ("if I die, the world doesn't actually go on, at least not in any way that matters to me, at best it becomes a parallel universe to mine")...