Yay this just made my day ❤❤❤❤

@sectumsempra9837

11 ай бұрын

I would never question your Intelligence Ma'am, But i am so shocked you have such through understanding and making such a great informative, educative video and kept it simple. I have seen so many tech bros spewing garbage and here you are making such a great Video. Love your work

@Grandma_Jizzzzzzzard

11 ай бұрын

@@sectumsempra9837 the user is AI.

@melindarivera6598

11 ай бұрын

​​​@@sectumsempra9837 In my opinion, she is the definition of a classy, strong woman, the epitome of what a woman should strive to be: intelligent or educated, kind, gentle, compassionate, loving, etc.

@sectumsempra9837

11 ай бұрын

@@melindarivera6598 I agree, am talking about how she broke my own stereotype of how is she more knowledgeable than some tech bro pushing misinfo on AI saying, art is dead , movies can be made on AI etc

As an AI researcher who has to try everyday to explain all of ethical issues with the current popular AI models, thank you for starting with the copyright issue, and for explaining the training process without falling in the trap of presenting the models as actually "intelligent" or having "agency" and making choices like we're in terminator. It's people (companies) making those choices and those choices are not inevitable.

@redwitch95

11 ай бұрын

Yeah, I'm not in the field of AI but I have a friend who does adjacent work, and it's been really frustrating how often people assume modern AI is identical to the AI you see in scifi.

@noxteryn

11 ай бұрын

The way I explain latent diffusion models is to think about it as an advanced form of autocomplete. Imagine Photoshop removing a person from a photograph, and then automatically filling in that area with things from the background. It can calculate, estimate, or predict what to fill in that area with by looking at what's around it, using probabilistic algorithms. A human can do this with great ease. If you look at a photograph of a person standing in front of a brick wall, you can assume that behind that person is just more brick wall. If you see a patch of red brick wall, you can assume the rest of the wall is made of the same red bricks in the same pattern. That's pretty much what stable diffusion does, using the prompts as a guideline on how to use the datasets.

@ashemedai

11 ай бұрын

As an IT guy who works and worked with AI/ML folks, this is why I love the term "stochastic parrots" and I do stress to people that current AI is anything *but*. I prefer to use terms like LLM etc to properly differentiate from "true" AI.

@tabularasa0606

11 ай бұрын

Also the danger does not come from AI, it comes from people abusing AI.

@Powertampa

11 ай бұрын

@@ashemedai Chatgpt is dumb as bricks if you ask it anything that it cannot find an already answered stackoverflow for. Is a great search engine though. I mean it's a language model, expecting it to have an understanding of anything but basic english is stretching it already.

It is staggering to me that the person who is explaining AI in the most practical terms is a cooking instructor. You are amazing.

@muenstercheese

11 ай бұрын

Same here. Ann is amazing at describing complex things in neutral, accurate ways. I love her for it.

@BlessedBeTheFroot

11 ай бұрын

*Food Scientist

@silkwesir1444

11 ай бұрын

Maybe it's not surprising. What I find staggering again and again is how good ChatGPT is with creating, modifying, mashing recipes, even though it actually should have no idea what it is doing. I use it all the time now. Learned a few new cooking techniques from it already. Another great thing about it is it's non-judgmental. Want to blend together a Japanese and an Italian dish? Go for it! No "But that's not how to do it..."

@toomuchiridium

11 ай бұрын

It does make sense when you realise she’s been explaining some comprehensive issues for a while now. But I agree all the same, Ann Reardon is amazing for doing what she does. 😉

@Mnstrava

11 ай бұрын

​@@silkwesir1444 I haven't researched this myself yet, but I'm curious how you would go about using chatGPT for creating reliable recipes and learning cooking techniques. Do you have a background in cooking which helps distinguish what would work or not, or do you just run some trial and error at face value? I'd be very impressed if it's at a level where in a newly created recipe all the proportions are correct! Which is why I imagine it being fantastic for finding inspiration and innovation, but you might still have to rely on your own common sense and subject knowledge? I'm just wondering how easy it is atm to use it for this purpose without having to do additional research to figure out if the output is good or not, especially if you're not very familiar with the topic.

I ran into the AI making stuff up problem in my chemistry class this spring. So many students tried using AI to do their honors projects. The more savvy students did rewrite what AI gave them, and submitted solid projects with accurate sources..Other students just submitted the AI product with no effort to check it's information, sources, etc. It was a glaring difference and easy to identify. Definitely going to add a lesson next school year on using AI effectively & pushing our admin to incorporate AI into our academic integrity policy.

@imthecoolest50

11 ай бұрын

It’s literally common sense not to copy paste from the internet, or AI in this case, and submit it as your own work. That’s plagiarism. Are people actually that lazy and stupid?

@sylviaramsay9180

11 ай бұрын

Have had a similar experience in courses about health

@adde9506

11 ай бұрын

Any student using AI to do their work for them, regardless of whether or not they checked and corrected it, should immediately fail the assignment. You didn't do the work, you don't get the credit, just like the kid that slacks off a group project.

@lisazimmerman5622

11 ай бұрын

@@adde9506 I'm not sure I agree with that. We already see people using AI to do their work for them in the workforce. If a student creates a project and uses AI generation to get them started on a scaffold, I don't have a problem with that. What I want to see is good academic rigor, citation of sources, and synthesis of what they are finding/learning. They should be able to stand on the shoulders of what was created before, as long as they aren't claiming others' work for their own.

@nonpondo_

11 ай бұрын

If you use AI to write the base paper, you should write another paper writing what you changed about the AI output to make it factual and proper

As an artist, AI is incredibly concerning to me since we are actively seeing companies go to AI for artwork in things like animation and book covers rather than hiring or commissioning real artists. art and artists are already so undervalued and underappreciated as it is, this just makes it so much worse. It's especially mind boggling to me since those AIs couldn't even exist without the real artist that they stole the works from.

@HeleneLogan

11 ай бұрын

This is exactly my concern, too. You’re absolutely correct.

@razmiddle9410

11 ай бұрын

Well yes. And you're part of the problem if you've ever purchased something made by machines rather than made by hand by an artisan -- a decoration, a rug, furniture, a book that used to be illustrated by hand. This is another shift, just like how textile workers watched the loom take their jobs -- the loom which was built because the creators watched textile workers do their jobs, just like AI being trained on human-created visual art.

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

Right! Artists have almost always been incredibly undervalued in society, and this is just adding injury to insult

@Eventide215

11 ай бұрын

It's almost like you didn't even bother to watch the video. You saw the title and just jumped to the comments. Also, what you say is pure conjecture and therefore misinformation until you've proven it. Anne actually proved you wrong in the video for why companies don't want to go to AI for artwork and such.

@ko2vo

11 ай бұрын

​@@Eventide215 Ann also covered the comic book that was initially copyrighted, then revoked once they discovered it was ai generated. If people are all honest, then sure there wouldn't be any fear, but people lie, companies lie, and there is a monetary incentive to lie. It's naive to ignore that aspect (or you just wanted to be mean to a stranger on the internet, in which case you should be ashamed of yourself)

A couple of lawyers in the US are on the verge of being disbarred because the junior lawyer used ChatGPT to write a legal document in which the AI _invented_ a bunch of legal cases in support of the plaintiff. Neither the senior lawyer nor the junior lawyer checked the cases to ensure they were real, but the defendant's lawyers certainly did.

@kristincox4041

11 ай бұрын

Your username gave me a good laugh!

@TheBaldr

11 ай бұрын

Let's just be clear they are not in trouble for using AI, they are in trouble for using fictitious cases, basically not checking to see if the AI was correct.

@ArtisanAsteroid

11 ай бұрын

@@TheBaldr Let's be honest. If you're willing to use AI in the first place for something like that, you had no business being in your field. In order to make things right, it'd take more work than starting from nothing.

@Eventide215

11 ай бұрын

@@ArtisanAsteroid It's much like was said in the video, AI can write these things *much* faster than you ever could. That's why people would want to use it. Especially people like lawyers that are on extreme deadlines. Why it wasn't ran through people to check for validity though I have no idea, that's something you'd normally do anyway.

@SharienGaming

11 ай бұрын

bwahahahaha that is some comedic justice XD now we just need some company getting sued because they used chatgpt to generate code and it causing some severe security flaw going into a customers production system XD

"If it doesn't have an answer in its dataset it will just confidently make stuff up" is basically what got me through college and a couple of jobs so I'd argue that's a surprisingly human approach, all things considered 😅

@HowToCookThat

11 ай бұрын

😂that comment made me laugh out loud.

@MasterXenex

11 ай бұрын

Yay, success! ❤🎉

@1nekrus

11 ай бұрын

And it's all candy and butterfly's, until it you realize machine can spew eldritch amount of text, that can take days, weeks or months to confirm if it's true or wall of text made of stupid.

@OhSoUnicornly

11 ай бұрын

Yeah, along those lines also when I've asked it to help with stuff for job applications or similar, even when I give it very specific points to make, it just sounds soooo generic! It's a bit too verbose I think. I asked for a 200 word answer and it insisted on giving an introduction AND a conclusion in that short answer.

@mrharvest

11 ай бұрын

Sure. But you wouldn't do that if there was a risk of harm to other humans. You would probably say "I'm not sure." An LLM on the other hand doesn't really consider that - they are trained with the implication that "I'm not sure" is a bad answer (it's really never the answer the user wants), so LLMs generally avoid that and instead just string together plausible words. It doesn't mean that the misinformation / data confidence problem cannot be solved, just that the current training approach has a gap.

I first encountered AI chat in the shape of an AI "therapist" in 1977. Having been in tech since those days, I have watched the evolution of many tools, AI included. The main problem lies not with AI but in the beliefs of its users. As a tech writer, I have learned to spot patterns (including being fairly reliable in identifying the native language of various writers writing in English). I can generally spot the patterns in AI text, and can trace its evolution, since I've watched it "grow up.". It's still essentially a probability generator. It has no concept of context. It does not distinguish Joe Smith the physicist from Joe Smith the dead cartoonist, and can mix and match. It literally does not know what "it" refers to. If I switch context, and "it" now refers to a cartoonist's works, it can hallucinate a reference. There is a case where a cybersecurity expert asked what chatGPT knew about him, and it replied with his obituary, and insisted he died in 2017. Even a nonfunctioning URL was furnished as a reference. But since it didn't know that a URL needed to point to collaborating information, it could not show where this information was obtained. But what if you are, say, a government entity who receives information that "you" are dead? You can see where this could go. (BTW, ask it to parse the "you" distinctions in those last two sentences.) Our biggest dangers are human: the tendency to believe it "thinks" like a human and the tendency to believe its outputs without question.

I really appreciate how well thought out this video is: Anne started with visual, more concrete examples, and slowly moved towards more abstract ones, to help viewers understand these concepts. Wonderful!

It's such a frequent issue people have, that they simply don't understand what they're using. Like the lawyer recently who used ChatGPT and then cited a bunch of imaginary cases. It's a CHAT bot. It's designed to talk to you and sound convincing. It is not the same as a search engine. You can't go into it expecting the same thing you would from asking a question in a google search. Even on google you shouldn't trust answers without knowing where they come from. It'd be like having a builder go "I don't get why all these nails didn't go in very well, I hit them with a screwdriver and everything!" It's using a tool for a job it's not designed for, then blaming the tool.

@noxteryn

11 ай бұрын

ChatGPT is actually incredibly powerful if you know how to use it. I use it everyday to help with my coding. Yes, if you blindly copy what ChatGPT offers, you will write garbage, but when you have very specific and targeted questions, ChatGPT is hundreds of times more powerful than Google. For example, giving error codes to ChatGPT is much more effective than simply Googling them and hoping to find a relevant forum post by someone who had the same problem. The difference can be solving a problem in a few minutes instead of a few hours.

@E42545

11 ай бұрын

Artist/builder and hobbyist researcher- this made me literally lol

I'm an artist and writer, and I definitely think Drew Gooden has made the best evaluation of AI art. Art, whether it's drawing, writing, videomaking, photography etc. draws from the human experience and their personal views to create something unique. AI can't have experiences or tell jokes or have any sort of nuance. They don't make original things, and they're just glorified search engines. So even if you could write whole books and movies with chatgpt, I don't care. The problem with AI are the big corps who are looking at AI like it's their next big moneymaker, and the people who are callous about self-expression and simply think "well my computer can do that now so artists and writers are useless". Edit to bring some more things up: I don't think AI is going to replace regular art, except in a corporate sense. Things look bleak, but there's still incredible works releasing today in all forms that are getting the praise they deserve. Don't support blatant cash grabs from corps, like terrible remakes and reboots (ahem Disney). Show that you don't want unoriginality Second, there is absolutely a difference between AI and commissioning or referencing. The "input" people put into writing prompts for an AI generator is facilitated by other people's work that's been plagiarized, who often do not consent to having their work being fed to AI. If you have a vision for something and don't think you have the skills to see it through, please commission an artist you like the style of. You get your art ethically, and they get paid. Win win for everyone. Referencing is not simply just copying someone else's work and passing it off as something unique (That's just lying about tracing). It's taking technical cues from them, such as perspective, colors, poses, anatomy, shapes etc. and utilizing them in your own work to enhance your original idea. It's also how we have "Draw this in your style" trends on social media.

@shadowfox009x

11 ай бұрын

I also see a lot of youtuber pushing AI generated low/mid-content books like drawing books and children's books and promising their viewers that they can make a lot of money this way. And a lot of people are falling for it and rushing off to throw up their AI book on Amazon. Where they then claim that they own the copyright to the content. I've tried AI for translations and the result required extensive editing to be readable. They showed that it was just a machine translating words but not understanding the context of the sentence and so often context is key. Like you said, the machine doesn't get jokes, or word-plays, or any sort of nuance. And they don't get cultural context (important in translations).

@littelitt

11 ай бұрын

Idk what callus means

@stellar783

11 ай бұрын

​@@littelitt now this is a prime example of who's at risk of being replaced by AI and who's not

@littelitt

11 ай бұрын

@@stellar783 that’s what callus means?

@Showsni

11 ай бұрын

@@littelitt Callus doesn't mean anything. Do you mean callous? A callous person is hard-hearted, and doesn't feel any sympathy or empathy for other people.

What worries me most about AI isn't the job replacement, singularity, or copywrite issues. I think the worst part about it is that AI threatens to replace CREATIVITY itself. People can easily fall for the convenience it offers. Why learn to draw when an AI can do it for you? Why learn to write, when an AI can do it for you? To create art is a journey, it's a wonderful feeling to make things. Getting good at an instrument. Finishing a thoughtful essay or script. Cooking a delicious meal for your family. The quality of that music, writing, cooking, etc. isn't all that AI cannot replicate. It cannot give you a feeling of TRUE satisfaction. While the outcome of art is fantastic, and I do love a good song, book, meal, etc. those are all just products, and I don't believe we should treat art (or care about it) for what it yields, but the joy it brings to produce. We are human, we were meant to express ourselves, having evolved to communicate using complex language, and making art on cave walls. AI is a quick and easy way to get the product, without the journey and self-expression. In my opinion, you miss out on a big part of life itself, by letting an AI create something for you. That brain is a muscle, use it or lose it. Lastly, AI has no love for anything, even if it became advanced to mimic it, there's no hormones responsible for love, a machine cannot feel. If a Grandma bakes you cookies, you know she does it with LOVE. If a robot made you cookies, there is no love behind that. Same goes for making AI create artwork of your pet. An AI feels nothing when it looks at an image of a kitten, puppy, etc... how are people okay with this? The use of AI can be problematic and insulting to others, but I think it's equally insulting to the self (if not more so). As humans, we should remember we are alive. We DO feel. An AI cannot make something because it loves you, it cannot be your friend, you deprive yourself of true connection by using it. Creation is an expression of love, I believe. A selfless expression (generally). We sing to express ourselves, and it brings people together because we resonate with those feelings. We cook for those we care about. We procreate because we see the beauty of life, and wish for it to thrive and persevere, like it always does.

@Stervelar

11 ай бұрын

Adding to that, people keep saying that Ai take references "just like humans", but I wonder if they actually have ever used references or tried to paint (digitally or traditionally). You can see a picture of a banana, and to you, even if you don't notice for yourself, it's more than pixels and color changes. You are likely to know that bananas are sweet, soft, easy to peel, have a distinctive smell, and are food, all that information goes into understanding the fruit and of course, the way you will depict it (if you don't know about it, you might feel the need to try and know as much as you can), but Ais can't internalize any of that. The visual information of a picture, is just one layer of it's significance and that is lost in current Ai models and I honestly don't spot a "prompter" who is concerned about this lack of versatility. Every style, has an origin, an intention, something that the artist want's to focus on, or exaggerate, all of it has a reason and to reduce it all to a prompt and patterns the prompter often don't even know/care about, is kinda lame to me. When you study another artist, you do more than trying to copy and learn from their work.

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

YES!! This is a huge point for me. It has no soul - something we already need MORE of in this modern world, not less

@stygianoatman

11 ай бұрын

@@Stervelar Exactly! And I think a lot of artists wouldn't even mind their art being referenced, by a human. Because unlike an AI, the human decided to use that art because they built an appreciation for it. If I wrote a Star Wars fanfic for example, it would be made with the two decades of burning love/passion I have for the series. It's something I actually respect, have reverence for. What I make wouldn't be perfect, maybe not even good, but we all have a heart like the original creator George Lucas. As you said, even a banana is more than a banana to people. Food is *literally* life. Art (the product) is not really life, but the essence of it sure is.

@stygianoatman

11 ай бұрын

@@stargirl7646 The saddest part is I've heard few people concerned about it, like frogs in boiling water unaware of the danger (though I know a frog actually jumps out) They can take our money, they can take our jobs, but the worse we can lose is our soul. I think something similar has basically happened with the food industry, fast food specifically. We value a product so much, that sometimes we forget the personal aspect that food offers. It was always supposed to be a more involved and social process. Not that there's anything wrong with a burger, just that cooking for others or even yourself is both a creative outlet, a means of socialization (as is eating the meal), and a way you love yourself. Similar to how a shower is self care.

@Gamesaucer

11 ай бұрын

I don't think that the creative process itself is under a lot of threat to be honest. Humans have always needed to keep busy. Leave a human alone in an empty room for a few minutes with a button that gives them an electric shock and they will usually start pressing the button, even though they know what it does. What's more important is that if AI can create images that are "good enough" it might start not just taking job opportunities from artists, but supplanting those artists entirely. On big productions like movies or video games or similar things, it's a corporate process that's prone to executive meddling, which is ultimately going to lead to inferior products just because, while they're e.g. of 30% lower quality, they're also 50% cheaper. And you may very well end up losing that creative spark that makes many of those works so special. It's not really that a human produced it, it's that it was produced with _intent,_ which AI cannot currently hope to do, and likely will not be able to do for decades if not centuries to come. There's nothing inherently inferior about "artificial" life over "real" life... it's just that for now, the "artificial" life we create sucks. With AI taking jobs from us, in the long run it should mean that we become more prosperous. If we have to do less to achieve the same, it means our working hours can decrease without our wages or standard of living decreasing. And if this is true, it'll leave more time to pursue hobbies and rather than worry about what you're going to eat if you don't find a job that pays better soon. I'm just worried that capitalism won't let this happen, as it's built on exploitation of a class-based society, which comes under threat from automation. Either our economy will have to change massively, or capitalism is going to keep from us the most important advantages AI promises in the first place. In conclusion... If circumstances allow, humans will keep being creative. And the more things become automated, circumstances should allow it more, not less. The restricting factor is the way our economy is currently structured, not the increasing prevalence of AI.

As someone who does applied AI research I can say that Ann, expectadly, did a great job without being too technical in her description. Keep up the great work! 😊

I don't like the "Some jobs will be lost, but others will come" argument. Yes, some will be able to learn these new jobs and work, but for those who lost their job, it may already be too late to learn it, and they will be left behind. In the end, these people care more about numbers than people, and it shows.

@kvasir8931

11 ай бұрын

So how many pieces of furniture do you own that was custom made from a carpenter vs machine milled and sold by IKEA? You had no problem with it until now.

@cassinipanini

11 ай бұрын

"some of you will die, but it is a sacrifice i am willing to make" - lord farquad 😭

@etherealclarity

11 ай бұрын

The problem isn't really with lost jobs that come from advancing technology - the problem is that we live in a society that doesn't take care of its people. We don't have a UBI or universal healthcare. We don't have adequate processes or systems in place to help people transition from one career to another. In an ideal world, jobs being taken over by technology (presuming it does it well, which is a separate argument) is a GOOD thing, because it SHOULD mean more leisure time for more people, and more freedom and opportunities to pursue things that excite and interest us. But we don't live in that world right now, because as a society we value capital over people and "hard working values" over prosperity and happiness.

@smolbean2110

11 ай бұрын

Doing research presentations last semester and same day I gave a presentation on the pros and cons of ai that I tried to be nuanced about, someone else gave a presentation about how ai is great and wonderful and we should all become programmers. Even as a comp Sci major it made my blood boil, people shouldn't be forced into one field because it's all that exists for them

@ShintogaDeathAngel

11 ай бұрын

@@etherealclarity so what would people do for money and fulfilling other needs if there aren’t any jobs because of AI? Do we go back to a bartering system or something to get things we need? Not that I believe every single job could be automated, but for the sake of argument let’s imagine AI is capable of putting everyone out of a job. Having a sense of purpose is also important to a lot of people, and not everyone gets that from, say, their hobbies or creating a family (if they are capable of that). Also, what effect would AI taking everyone’s jobs have on the relationship between government and society?

Its so unnerving going on artstation knowing that by default every post is used to train ai. Because theyre using an opt out system for every individual post, any old posts that haven't been tagged are able to be added to datasets.

I recently watched a news documentary concerning people using some type of system (possibly connected to AI?) to mimic the voice of an acquaintance or relative to scam money from, especially elderly, friends or family. Some lost their life savings. You're right, Ann, not everyone will use these things in honest ways.

THANK YOU ANN!! As an artist the excitement around AI bothers me to no end, because it ignores the concerns about copyright in an industry that takes usage rights extremely seriously (to say nothing of the misinformation and mistakes even a beginner artist could avoid). I appreciate you bringing attention to this, more people need to understand why AI has people from artists to computer scientists raising the alarm, and why it isn't paranoid "we're creating the terminator" panic.

@group555_

11 ай бұрын

What issue with copyright is there? Forgery is already illegal. Doesn't matter if you use a quil and ink or ai. If ai is responsible for the copyright breaks if it users. Then so it is the inventor of the pencil. It would mean every murderer is free to go, because it would be the weapon that's guilty

@mwater_moon2865

11 ай бұрын

@@group555_ 1. forgery =/= copyright infringement, that's some one selling a piece claimed to be created by some one else. CRI is pretty much the opposite, when you claim work of someone else is your own original. 2. The problem is AI is treated as a black box that's propitiatory info so we DON'T know what it's doing (and neither do it's "creators" because it's designed to re-write itself.) That lack of transparency makes CRI a very hard thing to prove in court, whereas if an artist copies a work, you can prove they were familiar with it and it's more than just derivative (legal threshold in the US is 70%, ie. if I take a copyrighted picture and rip it up and put it back together, call it collage and leave out a quarter of it, it's still copyrighted.) Think cars. If a car designer messes up and the gas pedal gets trapped under the floor mat and people die in an accident caused by the pedal getting trapped, the car company (Toyota in this RL case) has to recall affected vehicles, study what happened, say what went wrong, and develop a fix for it-- in this case they trimmed the accelerator pedals and made it clear that after market mats had to be secured. But when Tesla cars don't recognize flashing lights on stopped emergency vehicles means to be careful and plows into them at full speed and kills people, Tesla pleads "AI" and "it's proprietary" and maybe they will push an update or maybe they don't because it keeps happening anyway and people keep dying. And NOW there's a huge legal battle that's taken up time to force the company that's responsible for putting 2 ton chunks of metal zooming around at 70 MPH in the middle of our cities while telling the owners that it can do all the thinking because it has more sensors than a human has eyes... And lest you put it all on drivers, remember that consumers have the expectation that companies tell them the truth when advertising. One of my daughter's friends is blind in one eye due to cancer, their parents bought them a Tesla so they could "drive safely" but meanwhile a right blind 17 y.o. figures it's all good because the car can see when they can't.

@sd-ch2cq

11 ай бұрын

Some of the panic is just 'scare hype' though and should be ignored (an attempt by the AI companies to paint their creations as way more capable than they actually are). The real issues are with things like copyright and racism, and not with 'the algorithm turning self-aware'.

@nocomment4804

11 ай бұрын

What Copyright? It's perfectly legal to imitate an artist's style.

@xr6lad

10 ай бұрын

@@sd-ch2cqracism? Yawn. Yea ok.

Hands up to Ann for being one of the best content creators out there. The way she tackles all of these real life topics and makes them educational and entertaining is fantastic. I love how much her channel has grown over the years, she’s truly amazing.

The most frustrating part of all of this is that all this AI futurism is often dressed up as Star Trek Idealism, wherein everyone can ask a computer to do anything they like, and it just does it perfectly. The reason it's so frustrating is that in Star Trek, nobody has any money, because sentient labour isn't necessary anymore! There are no poor people, because EVERYONE has the magic computers! But in the REAL world, all these hyper-rich tech magnates want to use AI so that they can STOP PAYING PEOPLE FOR LABOUR, and then SELL the fruits of their human-supplanting-AI-labour in order to take MORE money from the general population to make themselves richer. It's just greed!

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

Oh gosh, EXACTLY.

@tcunero

11 ай бұрын

At some point if no one has jobs then no one has money, then rich people have no one to sell to. The star trek world is a post scarcity one, universal income may indeed need to become a thing when no one has a viable job because all the work is done by bots.

@littlestbroccoli

11 ай бұрын

Yes it is.

@ruthspanos2532

11 ай бұрын

Yes! It’s all very well to imagine a post scarcity future, but right now our tech billionaires seem perfectly happy to twiddle their dials in ways that increase their profits at the expense of everyone else. We need to wrest the control out of their greedy fingers, so these tools are used in ways that benefit all of us. If these dudes are concerned about AI destroying the world, they just need to limit its scope. Don’t hook it up to real world abilities. Put humans in between before any decisions are made that could end us all.

@mintish_

11 ай бұрын

@@tcunero and how many people would starve before that happened?

As a writer, I'm so glad you brought up ChatGBT because it feels like so many people never think of that one, like writing itself is a lesser art than the visuals.

@kristincox4041

11 ай бұрын

I’m a writer too and the possibilities with AI concerning written works is very worrying. I have read comments on various platforms where a person has an idea for a story, feeds it to an AI, and it spits out a novella or novel. And then bragging that they are “writing” ten books while another writer not using AI has produced one. Writing takes years to hone the craft and there is so much which goes into story telling and for someone to not have studied any of that and using a program think they are a writer is infuriating. There are even AI programs being used to lift from people’s fanfics or original works on sites like AO3 and Wattpad, changing some names then selling it as a digital print on Amazon. 😕

@gray_mara

11 ай бұрын

@@kristincox4041 The thought of how this will impact some already toxic corners of the writing world also worries me. Even before AI, if someone was deemed to be writing "too fast" there would be accusations of using ghost writers or lying about speed. There is no doubt that AI will cause a content explosion, but it's also going to feed a lot of pre-existing anger and bitterness.

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

@@kristincox4041 UGH yeah… that’s just sickening. I feel like one reason AI stuff is exploding is because our culture has become so focused on “content” in the Internet age. Quantity over quality. Whatever gets clicks. 😅

@mrinalkiran7013

11 ай бұрын

I have worked as a content writer for 5 years now. The companies we work at takes work from US clients. We get paid 3.6 USD for 1000 words (which is not enough). Now that AI has gotten so advanced, we have to check our articles for AI content and despite it being written solely by us, the detectors show 30-40% AI. And the company rejects as well as scolds us. One day I spent 2 hours writing an article and 5 hours editing it to get the detector to say it's not AI. Nope. I couldn't. I spent the entire day working on something that would pay me 3.6 USD and in the end, I didn't even get that. I finally left content writing and am now looking for jobs in my local area. It's draining.

@yazdhenab.

11 ай бұрын

Writter here to, french one, and I haven't encountered a book written by an AI, not yet, but as it took me 23 years for writing my first series of four books (I was a teenager back then) it's horrifying that something like a robot could write 500 pages book in a couple of hours. BUT ! It will never be as good as a real book, written in sweat and blood by a real person feed with caffeine and chips! xD

One thing to note about Stable Diffusion ai is that it doesn't really learn style, it just learns tags. Ai is incapable of producing poses or compositions which do not exist in its training, and tags are too broad to adequately separate elements from each other. Its why using a tag like "short hair" will suddenly change the entire composition despite pose and composition having nothing to do with hair being short. What you're doing is increasing the influence of the "images of short hair" and all training data close enough to it.

I'm impressed by your broad knowledge, and am glad that you use your platform not only for delicious chocolate desserts, but also to debunk 5-minute crafts and a broad spectrum of other things on the internet, instead of just "going for the click".

I’m a computer science student and I studied AI last semester. You did a good job breaking down a lot of the issues! One thing I will say is that GPT data sets (although I don’t know about GPT4 specifically) have been scrapped from Wikipedia or Reddit and they continue scrapping all the links it can reach from webpage to webpage as well as some other texts if I’m remembering correctly. This has had many bias issues in the past. There is also 2 interesting bias issues with datasets themselves. Most of the data collected in these giant datasets is not labeled, and (in many cases, there are some exceptions) AI need some labeling to begin training. Labeling is time consuming, labor intensive, and sometimes expensive. This has lead to giant datasets where large amounts of it hasn’t actually been checked by a human. These unchecked parts could contain misinformation, disinformation, bias, and it’s all being used to train. Publically labeled datasets though can also be an issue. An AI needs to have example of words to know what to make from that word. This doesn’t just include nice words. I can’t remember the name of the dataset but there was a public picture database with real humans pictures in it that you could look through. Real people’s images labeled “tweaker” showing a random person who maybe does drugs but certainly isn’t doing any in the picture. They also had categories for slurs. Imagine looking through a dataset and seeing your face under a label for a slur. Data is a huge and delicate issue. One facial recognition company got most of its data by scraping websites which specifically had no scraping rules, and for awhile their product was being used by the government. Do people realize that every bit of text and every image they post is being taken and used for AI training? Would they change their behaviors if they knew that? What if they were given the option to consent? Is it ethical not to give the option? How much of your information is already out there in a dataset you never consented to? These are just a fraction of the questions that need to be asked

@Liusila

11 ай бұрын

Aren’t all of these questions redundant if people openly share their data with the world up front? I moved from WhatsApp when Zuccergate happened but many of my friends proudly declared they “have nothing to hide” and didn’t care about their data being used. Welp, this is the price to pay and tbh they should have considered that their images or tags or videos or whatever might be used by whoever is creative and smart enough in the future.

@torbjornkallstrom2316

11 ай бұрын

I would certainly have had different concerns about uploading my images to the internet if I could have predicted they would be used in massive data sets to train AI. I bet a lot of artists would feel the same. But now the idea seems to be that we've all consented retroactively because our images are already on the internet.

@davidy22

11 ай бұрын

AI doesn't always need labelling to begin training. Text generation in particular can operate with just text input. Labelling is required for classification problems, not problems akin to time-series. If you've just done one semester on AI so far a language model of the same architacture as the LLMs is probably too time consuming, but try building a markov chain model for yourself so you have an idea of how language models are actually trained.

@MossyMozart

11 ай бұрын

@thetableoflegend9814 - "scrapped" OR scraped? Huge difference, young AI-bot!

Another important thing is that, once a model for art like Midjourney is trained on a specific dataset (Eg, drawings made by Banksy), it is very difficult/near impossible to un--train that model on those images. I say this because some time ago, Deviantart used their art database to train their own AI art generator. People got upset so the site gave users the choice to opt out their images from the AI's training. The thing is, if their images have already been used, then it's impossible to un-use them. It's practically irreversible, like cooking an egg. You'd have to throw that AI model away and make a new one. But companies aren't about to do that and they're definitely not gonna tell thousands of small creators which art was used to train it.

As a writer, thank you so much Ann for bringing awareness to this. It's all fun and games with AI, until real life people and their jobs and livelihood are affected.

Chinese and Korean game companies recently started using AI art instead of hiring human artists. It happened en masse, a ton of people lost their jobs and are now unemployed, unable to find a job again in the industry. The struggle against the graphic artists is more than real. It is happening as we speak.

The topic of AI is seriously becoming a huge anxiety trigger for me - it seems so stupidly impossible to stop “progress” when there’s a profit to be made 😭 I have to hope that more sanctions and guidelines will eventually be added. I have to hope for SOMETHING.

@rolboo6158

11 ай бұрын

Same but cuz I'm an artist amd is rlly the only thing I can stand

@Powertampa

11 ай бұрын

Try one of the freely available ones. Ask it some hard questions that require more than just a google search and it falls apart rather quickly. They have no thought or actual critical thinking, they just match one side of the equation to the other. You can't make a machine based on TRUE or FALSE logic gates have the nuance of human thought. Don't think that'll happen unless you have a computing revolution that somehow increases the computational power by magnitudes of millions or billions. I'd worry more about having to clean up the mess the current models make and having a boss that's too dumb to know that Chatgpt is a language model not a code generator.

@krila3978

11 ай бұрын

​@@Ash-gk8jp Because there's profit to be made.

@Plum_bird

11 ай бұрын

Maybe the are just giving us access to faulty AI with the intention of advancing AI to the point it can assimilate more quickly and respond.

@leigh0630

11 ай бұрын

@@rolboo6158 Im an artist too, i feel you 😭

The AI artwork problem is massively concerning for artists because artists already struggle a LOT from a multitude of issues outside of AI, and this includes people trying to steal and grift from their work, AI just makes it easier. People have been reselling patreon content or straight up giving out for free for years. Artists have to deal with their works being stolen and traced or recoloured with thieves claiming they have created that work themselves and often need to take action against these people to make them stop - hell I myself had someone steal and lazily draw over an old sketch of mine on Discord, despite the WIP of my image being 2 posts above it, and the thief panicking and just disappearing once confronted about it. The freelance artist market is heavily stacked and still growing, and artists are constantly underselling their work to remotely get their business off the ground (especially when compared to industry standards and salaries.) AI art does nothing but flood an already saturated market with, what in my opinion, is essentially digital forgeries that undervalue the actual work and skill that goes into making art. They solely focus on the outcome and product of the art and never the process or fun that goes into making it. And whilst some AI outcomes can be easy to tell if their made using AI, that argument is not going to hold up for long, and it already isn't. PLENTY of AI users (especially furry related ones) on twitter are mass producing artwork that look nigh indistinguishable from actual pieces. There are already many dramas and communities that are turning on legitimate artists under the suspicion their works may be done by AI when they aren't. And no, learning how to use the programs to produce AI art barely compares to actually learning to draw - using a bunch of code made by someone else, that rearranges noise and pixels from existing assets stolen from the works of others does not make you an "artist." If you know how to mod games like Minecraft or a Fallout game, you can easily figure out how to use Stable Diffusion locally on your computer through process of mucking around and finding out what settings and prompts works best. That is never going to be a comparable substitute for learning all the art fundamentals, years of practice and studying to actually be able to draw, paint, model, animate, etc. Most artists can't even fight for the copyright of their own work like the music industry can because we can't afford to toss around lawsuits everywhere, especially the younger lot in the freelancer crowd. A lot of us are just average people trying to get by, so when we see our work stolen we just have to kinda call it out in public/online and hope they stop out of guilt on their consciousness (which never happens, because they'll usually just grift from another artists work instead or just rebrand under a new account.) And just, us artists don't need "AI art programs" that make stuff for us, because artists literally pride themselves on making things. We love the process, thats why we literally do it lmao. We have been using AI tools for a pretty long time to create shortcuts and make processes easier, such as CSP with the pose or hand scanner that makes the posing of 3D models easier, or interpolation for animators on programs like Cacani, but they never automatically make the things for us because that takes half the fun out of art; MAKING IT. So the people who benefit from AI art generators are literally grifters and commissioners who want something made on the fly

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

Exactly! The fun of art is MAKING it. It’s an expression of our human souls

@TheYargonaut

11 ай бұрын

By that reasoning neither photography nor collage are legitimate art media. By the reasoning of not being a substitute for skills, digital painting should never have been adopted when acrylics exist, and acrylics should have been rejected when oil paints existed, and oil paints should have been rejected when tempera already existed. Each innovation changes the skills necessary. Let the new tools find their place, and use the tools you find best for your own goals.

@OfficialR3M1X

11 ай бұрын

​@@TheYargonaut ... What. The reason photography and digital art didn't wipe out portrait artists or anyone who chose tubes of paint, a brush and a linen canvas over a digital one is because these new mediums opened new pathways for the art world, and *created* new *artistic* skillsets for us to learn and then, use. AI art does. Not. Do. That. It seeks to REPLACE artistic skillsets entirely. The process goes as; Coming up with a series of one to three word descriptive prompts in a string, chucking it into a program, and you get an end result. If it sucks? Try again or use a reference image for the AI to REPLICATE from. Any insinuation that this is some form of elaborate, creative and artistic process is going to insult any photographer, photobasher and painter, and they will go "what in the bum-licking hell are you on about." Art, the general premise, is a human thing born from our psyche. Music was created and evolved because we like when certain sounds are arranged together. Creative writing and literature was born from our desire to want to communicate and portray ideas in a manner that you can make others imagine it in their head, even if it might be different from what you might have envisioned. Visual art was born to portray the things that your mind projects in a way that someone can see it and understand it. And sure, any artist often is going to make a lot based on our existing surroundings and the things we take in throughout our lives. You could say we copy and mimic things a lot when we create, like referencing an image for a drawing, or using an already existing beat or rhythm when creating a new track. And what makes someone 'creative' is to adapt the information we know in a way that has meaning to it's creator, *which is why people pursue to learn how to make it.* AI image generators do not do that because it's a program. An AI program does not have the capability to learn from human experiences, or gain a talent or learn skills, and rather instead creates predictions on other's human experiences. It REPLICATES, not creates. And the person using it? They aren't going to even develop any skills artistically. They aren't learning to draw, or paint, or how they should creatively compose any part of the image because the program just does it for them. Hell they wont even be reaching post 8th grade creative writing levels to create elaborate prompts because all the AI needs is at most a noun and a couple of adjectives to regurgitate an outcome back. Most people I see online don't even go out of their way to think of prompts themselves and literally just ask other people on what prompts they should use! AI image programs aren't tools for artists and it doesn't make people artists. The people that benefit from them are the ones who can't be arsed to actually create something themselves and instead just want the thrill of wanting to have the label from a bunch of people gawking at what they "made" for instant gratification (that probably compares to a fraction of what an average real painter experiences when people enjoy their results and feel that their actual hard work pays off hmmmm.) AI art literally invalidates and steals off of the people who spend years learning and practicing their craft, I've already seen plenty of my favourite online artists have their works funnelled into AI models and data sets, and have their body of work and style REPLICATED down to the very core. Just there, free to download for anyone to use. I wouldn't be surprised if I was a victim of this too in the future. Will I be mad? Ye, for a bit, but I'll just keep at it and evolve my work to gain interest if I have to, and I'll appreciate those who want to experience my thoughts and ideas, whilst someone else goes to become a factory printer who'll just keep making the same thing from a dataset that'll probably get boring to look at eventually. Side note (because I feel like I might get this comment in one way or another;) no this isn't gatekeeping. Anyone has the potential to become an artist and it is easier now than ever with resources like KZread to teach people, and you don't need much to start out. Grab a post-it note and a pen, or grab your phone camera and snap some pics. Just have the will to do it. You may not like some of your early steps, and it may take some time to really get on your feet, but you'll be able to look back, laugh about it and really see how far you have come, and how far you can go! And lets be real, with the recent CRS report on May 11th says anything, it's that the only place AI art is going to find itself is inside a courtroom for copyright infringement! 🤫

@luciferschoice

11 ай бұрын

All of this. Thank you.

@TheYargonaut

11 ай бұрын

​@@OfficialR3M1X That's a fine argument that AI art is low-effort, low-skill, or not deserving of prestige, but it has no relation to whether or not it's art or whether ones using the AI are artists by the bare meaning. If you enjoy the other processes, the existence of AI art & artists can't take that away from you. And if other people are happy using it to avoid some of the accidental complexity of other media, good for them as well.

Great job, Ann! Excellent overview of some of the current issues with AI. I've been in a job that was changed/downgraded due to AI. I did medical transcription, which eventually morphed into "editing" voice-recognition-generated reports (at a lower rate of pay, of course). The voice recognition would "learn" that when a particular doctor in a particular specialty said a particular phrase, what it meant, but it couldn't recognize exceptions. For example, when a doctor dictates the letters E, G, F, and R, he/she almost always means eGFR, which stands for estimated glomerular filtration rate. Once in a blue moon, in a patient with lung cancer, it should be EGFR, which stands for epidermal growth factor receptor. The E being capitalized or not makes a crucial difference. Voice recognition will "learn" that it is significantly more likely referring to eGFR and put that. Just one more example: Doctors frequently say adventitia when they are referring to adventitious sounds heard when listening to breath sounds. Voice recognition software will "learn" through the "editing" process to change adventitia to adventitious sounds. Adventitia, however, does have an actual meaning not related to breath sounds. It is the outer layer of fibrous connective tissue around an organ. An experienced medical transcriptionist can know the difference between eGFR and EGFR and adventitia as slang meaning adventitious sounds and actual adventitia and transcribe accordingly, but AI is nowhere near good enough. Those are only 2 examples from the multitude I remember from my time as a former medical transcriptionist, and yet voice recognition software with its AI component was responsible for a drop in pay such that I eventually left the profession. This will likely happen to more and more jobs as time goes on.

Ever since your video on fractal wood burning popped up on my feed I've been so enthralled with your videos. Thank you for fitting educational content around charming baking videos, it really is an amazing combo 😍

My main concern with AI models, particularly the language models, is not an issue with AI at all, but with a lack of critical thinking in general society. AI, ofc, isn't the root cause for any of these issues - misinformation, copyright infringement, plagiarism, bias, etc. It's just unfortunate that we keep trying to address these issues on a surface level. Which is why I love your channel, Ann!! It is so vital to have people like you - and Legal Eagle, Doctor Mike, etc. - who are out there educating people, asking important questions, making us consider things we might not have realized.

@arturoaguilar6002

11 ай бұрын

It doesn't help when the owner of the specific AI service saw pretty much impossible to credit all the people who made the images they were about to feed to the AI, so they feed them without crediting anyone. Can't really blame general society when the key people behind the AI are the ones lacking critical thinking.

@cassinipanini

11 ай бұрын

@@arturoaguilar6002 i would say thats not a lack of critical thinking, its actually very smart given the situation. sadly its also unethical af

I really love how you investigate an issue and explain it so simply. You aren't just a baker but a true scientist. Thank you for your amazing videos.

We can always rely on you for a thoughtful, measured, and well-researched take on any subject you produce a video about. The internet, nay, the world needs more Ann Reardons.

I’m not afraid of AI, I’m afraid of who is programming it or feeding it.

@noxteryn

11 ай бұрын

Most AI projects are open source, meaning that there is full transparency in how they're coded.

@LeafyK

11 ай бұрын

Agreed

@ruthspanos2532

11 ай бұрын

I am mostly afraid of who is profiting from it.

@drakewinwest9888

11 ай бұрын

“I’m not afraid of the super-above human intelligent system capable of coding, complex problem solving and of which I have no idea it’s goals or motivations, I’m afraid of humans but I already understand that threat.” You. An idiot.

@lbaxel9122

11 ай бұрын

@@ruthspanos2532 Why? Do you expect work to not generate profit?

over the past few months I've noticed AI waste in Google image results - if I try to look up a specific but kind of obscure term (one recent example was "realistic alligator in a suit"), over half of the results are incomprehensible AI generated mush. AI generated content clogging up all corners of the internet is already becoming an issue that I imagine is going to continue to spiral as it's popularity increases and millions of gigabytes of it continues to be generated

@ghoulchan7525

11 ай бұрын

same with Deviantart, artstation, any art site really unless they have a strict No Ai image policy. is flooded with these things.

@noxteryn

11 ай бұрын

I just tested your claim on Google, both with and without quotation marks, and couldn't replicate it. I see a few stock photos, some illustrations, and the rest are just plain alligators. If KZread allowed it, I would post a screenshot here to prove it to you, but I can't. I can assure you I see no "AI generated mush". My first assumption is that you have enabled Google's personal recommendations based on history, so your Google searches are showing you AI-generated images because that's what you've been clicking on. You can disable this option, and your searches will be fine.

@Lord_Slug

11 ай бұрын

@@noxteryn I don't click on them and I don't seek them. to check I went thru my history and my exact search was "realistic anthropomorphic alligator" and it remains true that most results are ai nightmares. feel free to test that query and see if it's true for you. this wasn't the only search result where this has happened but I can't remember what I was searching for outside of that one. see if your results reflect what I'm getting now with that exact prompt

@noxteryn

11 ай бұрын

@@Lord_Slug You're right. The query "realistic anthropomorphic alligator" does produce a lot of results from AI-generated artworks. I even tested with with adding negative keywords like "-ai" and still got a lot of AI art. I noticed that removing the "realistic" part helped a lot, and shows cartoony drawings. I will admit that is indeed a problem, though for the sake of argument I would say that the query itself is somewhat obscure. I mean, even without the AI thing, I would have naturally assumed that such query will show furry porn or something. But I will concede the point. Yeah, this is troublesome.

I used chatGPT once for fun and had it give me an itinerary for a trip to Cozumel and it told me to go scuba diving right after I flew in. That could be very dangerous, even deadly. When I typed back “but you can’t dive within 18 hours of flying” it said “you’re right, it is not advisable to dive after flying” 😱

I'm a casual writer, mostly doing fan fictions. Every time I prepare to upload a new chapter I'm anxious about what AI could do. Sure, I've set my writing page to only be visible to registered users and deleted anything that might be online elsewhere, but I've also come to accept that the only way I can be certain that my works can't be scraped to train AI is to delete them all from the internet. I don't want to do that, I know I have international readers and I would hate to suddenly disappear from their lives.

As an artist, I'm very grateful for your video. AI is a BIG problem for the art community, there's no doubt about it - why would people want to pay artists to paint for them, if they can easily generate a picture for free, after all? It's so frustrating and disheartening. News (at least here in Germany) keep ignoring that problem entirely, whenever AI is mentioned, they merely report on subjects such as fake news generated by AI or students cheating, which yes, are serious problems too. But artists are never mentioned and it breaks my heart a little whenever I see AI "artists" with millions of views or likes. I'm a smaller, unknown artist and I've put decades into my craft. Every artwork takes days, weeks, if not months - and here I am, fighting not only against algorithms that hide my art, but against AI too. It feels like fighting windmills and thus I'm often left feeling very, very hopeless.

@tcunero

11 ай бұрын

I do understand your frustration. However is there a difference between this and any other job that technology has taken over? A cobbler? Blacksmith? Printing press replacing scribes? Clocks replacing people that used to come to your door to wake you. It just seems that this is that time in history for another skill.

@MetalheadAndNerd

11 ай бұрын

Photographers said the same when everyone started carrying a high quality camera in their pocket.

@mimosa5174

11 ай бұрын

⁠@@tcunero your view of the world is so bleak!! The examples you cite weren’t exactly how humans expressed themselves. They were jobs that came about because of a necessity and disappeared when the necessity did too. Art and artists have existed since the dawn of humans because we have a natural need/drive to express ourselves so it would be very sad to see them disappear.

@RejectedInch

11 ай бұрын

@@MetalheadAndNerd that argument is BS.

@RejectedInch

11 ай бұрын

@@tcunero BS. Through and through. Back to primary school, history class will help. Also a class about " how to shut up when not knowing jacksh*t" will help.

I'm an artist. ever since the issue of AI taking over the art community with AI it has been bugging me. lots of people seem to hv different opinions on it but for me, it's disrespectful when artists work hard to produce a piece but then AI takes the credit when they're only mixing lots of people art works to make it theirs

@scw55

11 ай бұрын

People who use AI to create images are just art directors. They tell the entity what they want and how they want it, and the entity makes it. People who use AI to create images are not artists. For myself, it frustrates me when people post AI-generated images, but the person hasn't gone to the time or effort to fix the image.

@scw55

11 ай бұрын

@@michellev2630 I feel like AI art has increased the value of artists posting in progress work and time lapse videos. I don't know if this is on a whole good or bad, but it's changing the content artists post.

@E42545

11 ай бұрын

FYI this isn’t what generative image models do- they look at thousands of images and learn what a thing looks like, and then *generate* a completely new image from that information, literally based on a cloud of noise (think like TV static). There is no direct taking or collaging of anything, it’s the exact same way people make art out of “nothing” from things they have seen before.

@scw55

11 ай бұрын

@@E42545 absolutely reductive. There is no human experience to filter or stain the work. It is clinical and theft.

@christopherbennett6571

11 ай бұрын

@@E42545 Nope. Absolutely wrong. Ai generated images even have watermarks on the generated work to the point where it's even become a default hashtag to say #nowatermark

Hi Ann - I've got a hereditary hearing loss, and I just wanted to say how much I appreciate the captions on your videos. I'm not sure that regular-hearing people even notice them, but I do, and it makes such a huge difference. Some creators don't take the time to make captions and I'm forced to rely on the automatically generated ones, which are accurate enough but have trouble with non-US accents in particular in my experience (speaking of bias). So, I appreciate that you take the time. ❤ On the topic of AI, can I ask if you're using the Premiere Pro tool to "auto-generate" captions as a starting point and then editing/fine-tuning the results from there? Either way, thank you (or your editors, if you have those?!) for taking the time and for being inclusive of people with hearing loss. It's very thoughtful and much appreciated. Great content as always.

@shainazion4073

11 ай бұрын

You do realize that most KZread channels have close caption available by you just enabling it.

@gwyndlin

11 ай бұрын

@@shainazion4073 Yes, I even mentioned auto-generated captions in my comment. They're not perfect.

@shainazion4073

11 ай бұрын

@@gwyndlin My Grandmother was totally blind, she went blind in her 50s. I always was aware of others disabilities. I have a deaf cousin also, she taught us some sign language throughout the years. She reads lips though to help when in the hearing world.

Thank you so much for talking about this! I write fanfiction and publish it to ao3 (which is accesible for everyone, even if you do not have an account) and the fanfiction community is pretty much sure that our works were used to train AI's like ChatGPT. People tested this by giving a very specific prompt that was basically the discription of a fanfiction or a specific scene in fanfiction and depending on how many works exist that are similar, sometimes the AI would just say their exact words back at them. Hearing that left me feeling so disgusting, like I'd been used. It felt really good to hear you talking about the issue

Trusting information going forward is definitely going to be harder unless serious steps are taken, and just finding things that aren't AI generated is going to be problematic. Kyle Hill brought this up on his science channel, as there are now a rapidly growing number of 'science' channels populated with entirely AI generated videos of questionable value, but put out every 12 hours so as to always have something new to click on. On a different note, what an adorable dog!

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

Oh dear…

@leemasters3592

11 ай бұрын

That video came to my mind too when Ann mentioned fact checking and ability to trust your sources.

@littlestbroccoli

11 ай бұрын

I can honestly see a time soon when it'll be perfectly understandable for someone to say, "Oh, I don't go online" because of the trash heap the web is going to turn into. And that will probably get better eventually, but not before it gets so tiresome that millions of people don't even bother.

@Eye-Of-The-Beholder

11 ай бұрын

Oh sweet another Kyle Hill watcher! I think that the fact that we have content creator so different from each other discussing this topic speaks volumes on how sever the issue at hand is

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

@@littlestbroccoli hey, I was just thinking about that possibility too! Thanks for putting it into words. I can definitely see a time where there’s so much trash online that we end up going analog again… maybe that wouldn’t be a bad thing lol?? 😅

Let us all applaud the editing for the introduction lol that was some intense content

@HowToCookThat

11 ай бұрын

thanks 😀

Data scientist here. You underline very well the concerns with the creation of AI models. Concerning worries about the AI usage, I want to emphasize AI is a tool. Like a knife, there are OK usages (e.g. cutting veggies) and not OK usages (e.g. murdering people). AI can't act by itself no more that a knife could murder someone by itself. You need people to plug the AI result somewhere for them to have an impact. The people that create the AI are responsible for the data they use and the scope of use they define, while the users of AI are responsible for misuse or out of scope use. This is not yet a legal responsibility, but will soon be (the AI Act). This isn't going to be easy to apply of course, but reminding AI is a tool highlight its usage is a mix of tech and people problem, so the best solutions will most likely be a mix of tech and people solution too.

Thank you so much for this Anne. When I was a kid I used to think AI was cool. Im now all grown up and a passionate artist, AI is now a threat to us. Not just artists but voice actors, musicians, photographers- just a widespread of mediums! You see these people winning contests from generated content and its just disgusting. Now its AI bros harassing creators being "adapt and let it go" for heavens sake it makes me sick.

Honestly what's frustrating me is the fact that AI users started calling themselves "artists". I am following a page on facebook, which posts different AI generated outfits. One day the admin posted a photo of herself and said "the face behind the artist". I can't believe someone that writes a few stuff and lets the computer do the other things, calls themselves an artist, lol.

@E42545

11 ай бұрын

This is exactly what people said about the camera, and then the digital camera, and then the iPhone camera lol

@jaychang6723

11 ай бұрын

@@E42545 even with camera photos there are still lots of human aspects that go into them: the framing, the backdrop, composition, and you know…physically going somewhere to take the photo. I’d argue comparing all of that to typing keywords onto an AI generator without much modification is a bit of a stretch

@E42545

11 ай бұрын

@@jaychang6723 if you saw the way the photography community reacted to the announcement of the first smartphones with excellent cameras, you’d know it’s not. Obviously all art (including photo) requires *some* kind of human input and is subjective even in its definition of art to people’s desire to consume it. Generative Art both requires human input and is clearly something (I’m not saying everyone) people enjoy. This is absolutely the same mindset of all the people who gatekept and screeched “low effort!” and “muh job!” when people started getting good phone cameras and inexpensive DSLRs for Christmas and taking beginner-level portrait sessions for $20. Imo there’s no such thing as saturation unless you’re not special or unique and are easily replaceable to begin with- and life and creating gets a lot more comfortable once you realize that we all are.

@SnailNick00

11 ай бұрын

@@E42545 You are comparing photos still taken by humand to pictures generated and stolen from actual artists. Do not downplay this issue you clown.

@cactustactics

11 ай бұрын

I'll say there is work that goes into generating these images, and often people are sketching out ~something~ and saying "make this look like my prompt", so there ~can~ be effort and even creativity involved (to a point). But it's the model that's actually generating the image obviously, and are you a "writer" if you give a prompt to ChatGPT and post its results? Are you a "writer" if you curate the results by tweaking the prompt, and only posting the output you like? What if you remove the AI from the equation, and you're just giving a prompt to another human who's producing the results? Are you an artist if you tell someone what to draw? There's an argument that maybe you have a "vision" that you're using someone else to create, but is that really what's happening when you don't have full control over the output, and it's more "see what you get"? What about when people are copy-pasting blobs of keywords in their prompts that other people have worked out give good results instead of bad and meh ones? Personally, what really gets me about people calling themselves artists is when the image has obvious problems, like backgrounds that don't make sense, impossible anatomy etc. If you're an artist, why not take pride in your work and fix it, and only put it out when it's good enough? A lot of it comes off like they don't actually care, they generated something that they think looks cool and they just want to say "check this out!" Which is fine, but it's more like "look what I found" than "look what I made". And sometimes "did you even look at this yourself?"

I don’t want to sound all “holier than thou” but it really saddened me when I was the only person in one of my university classes who actually wrote my final essay. The other 11 people admitted in our class group chat to using ChatGPT (I’m shocked they would admit such a thing without the fear of someone in there reporting them). We all got As, so I feel extremely disappointed and demotivated going forward, if everyone around me is just gonna get the same grade as me when I was the only one putting in hard work.

@kvasir8931

11 ай бұрын

Hard work has never mattered. Its always the end result

@ShintogaDeathAngel

11 ай бұрын

@@kvasir8931 and sometimes getting a result does actually require hard work?

@cactustactics

11 ай бұрын

If it helps, you're at uni (and probably paying for it) to learn, to be guided to develop knowledge and skills and experience. That's the point of an essay, the thought and the research and making your argument. You did that hard work ~for yourself~ and you grew because of it, y'know? Try not to worry about what everyone else is doing, and keep pushing yourself to do the best you can! You'll come out actually having gained something for your money and time besides a certificate Besides there's nothing new here, people paying for essays has always been a thing - it's just now it's free, worse quality with higher likelihood of errors, and more likely to get caught out. And even if they got away with it at the moment, it doesn't mean stuff won't be scanned in future, trip some flags, and have them called in to explain their essay that they didn't write, and what they meant by ~this part~ or why ~this citation~ is made up. This stuff is suddenly kind of a big issue now, so it's gonna get a lot of scrutiny - so it's not worth risking it anyway

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

WTF?! I’m so sorry!

@dondcco

11 ай бұрын

Results get graded, and you can even be hired on the basis of those results. But you will need to actually perform tasks and make transformative work to actually be successful, which are dependent on skills, which is what you gained by actually doing the work. I hope you don't get discouraged :)

I appreciate how calm and articulate your commentary is This video eased my mind a bit and you provided valuable arguments against the ethics of AI I’m very tired of the hysteria

May I just say I love the way Ann incorporates her family into her videos. right down to her dog.

As an artist who loves to share other creator’s work, it’s becoming increasingly hard to filter out the massive amounts of AI content. It’s frustrating because I don’t believe AI art is art, so being 100% sure of a human hand creating the works I’m sharing is becoming nearly impossible. It’s getting to the point that I’m scrutinising every piece for inaccuracies, which isn’t helpful as humans are capable of errors. I don’t feel good in looking at an image and thinking “Is that anatomy because the artist is still learning, or is it because of AI?”. Just a couple of years ago I could share work with confidence, but now I need to second-guess it all. It’s not helpful for new artists as they feel like their effort isn’t worth it because someone can just type in a paragraph to get something in seconds. I do feel this will negatively effect the art community, and as a result, we’ll see fewer human artists sharing their experiences with the world, which is a really depressing thought.

@kvasir8931

11 ай бұрын

Basically "if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck Im the one who decides if its a duck or not"

@wakingcharade

11 ай бұрын

It's totally reasonable to want to only promote art of a certain type or made by certain people in certain ways, and this has always been an issue sharing art - is this stolen? traced? posted without permission? is the person who made this also drawing terrible things or do they have a history as a person of harmful actions? Do we do research on every image we see or just the ones we share? And what happens if we mess up? The question of what is or isn't art has been debated for as long as humans have had a concept for art. It's also come up every time new technology appeared. Photographers dealt with it to - how can it be art, if all you do is take the image and frame it as art? Having reservations about the ethics of AI generated images, or wanting to uplift art made without it both make a lot of sense. I'm just not sure how, if you cannot tell the difference between two images without knowing the full processes of their creation, you can't say one "is art" and the other "is not" unless you are defining art in some way that requires us to know the full process of its creation. Which, if you are, I'm curious what your definition is -- As I've said, there are hundreds floating around out there at least, so there is not going to be a definitive or scholarly answer on if something that uses AI image generation can be art, I don't think. I also wonder what you think about art that uses AI as a tool, but also involves a human curating and editing and manipulating it in some way? And in which ways make it art (ethics aside) vs which do not? Like if someone asks mid journey to iterate in specific directions and keeps adding new conditions and new curation, that may not be, but if they take the image from mid journey and use it as a reference, that resulting human painting would be. So the answer lies somewhere between them? I'm curious where you think that is. What if an artist feeds exclusively their own art into the program? Or only their own art and public domain works - like from over 100 years ago? I really do hope that young artists don't give up because of this. There are always going to be people who produce art faster and with more precision than you, be that visual art or music or writing. But the purpose of creating art is to realize your own unique vision. I think the flip side to all of this is that if we could make an AI art generator that is ethical - taken only from public domain, say, it could allow more people to realize their creative visions, to tell their stories, to make references, to share ideas, all kinds of things -- that would still not be art made by a human hand, but if it is made to realize a human vision, even if you don't call it art, even if you want to make a space that excludes it from the collection, couldn't it still have value?

@razmiddle9410

11 ай бұрын

Visual art will be more of a hobby, like woodworking or rug making. Woodworking is a fun hobby but not particularly lucrative because machines can do it better, faster, and cheaper. Whatever you think is special about visual art used to be seen as a special about many other kinds of creation, there's no moral uniqueness to machines getting involved in visual art as well.

@lotusdragonjbh

11 ай бұрын

I feel you. It’s pitiful how many people want to pretend they did something when they didn’t. By definition and the The US copyright court state that these generated images can not be labeled as art , nor copyright protected simply because the were not made by human hands: these programs have no agency or reason and can not explain why certain things were executed like they were. Besides the prompter(commissioner’s) input , which is just a request, no human makes these images. So yes , there is a very good reason to not consider these images worth sharing. People getting hype on these things are usually after the gimmick, not the work itself. And anyone who says these are “better” than actual artists- 1) no they are not, plenty of artists draw better than these things, they do quality over quantity. These programs are spam machines. 2). These algorithms, got this good because the database laundered work from artists that were better. So I agree, why share work completely generated by a computer and have no effort outside of someone having good fast food ordering skills. Only plus is that all these images are public domain. I also don’t understand why ai shills and non-artists are pushing artists to use this technology when they could already draw without it. But whatever, don’t let this tear you down. More people are realizing these negatives and standing up to it. Programs like mist and glaze poison these laundered datasets composed of stolen data, more places are scrutinizing ai and its negative effects, numerous governments are stepping in and there is much talk of regulation, some sites are developing ways to detect ai images and ban it, there is the copyright thing. There is hope. And artists don’t need a glorified pony generator to create, their skills can be transferred to damn near any medium. An ai prompter is useless outside of a computer. Hopefully that is some sort of comfort, sorry for the ramble.

@bluemoon7785

11 ай бұрын

I understand your concerns. But shouldn't technology avance though?

When I saw this video title I worried for a moment, especially having seen some creators I wouldn't have expected getting really on board with AI and ChatGPT uncritically. Don't know why I worried though, this was a really thorough well-rounded video!

Ann! I came back to watch this again tonight - 8 days later. (I always watch your videos within about 3 hours of you posting). As I have noticed a change in what KZread is suggesting I watch. You are so right about the algorithm and AI - thanks so much for educating me. I started watching because you made amazing cakes and debunked a lot of stuff I got wrong when making cakes. Then I loved your miniature stuff and now I get educated beyond things I would have thought about. You and your family are amazing - you always explain things with common sense and without mumbo jumbo. I will now watch 10+ old movies and lots of cooking shows so KZread resets my favourites. Keep making content - you are the sane person in a weird world.

I appreciate your take on the subject! You always do such a good job of breaking down a complex subject into something easily understandable.

As an artist, something to note about AI is that there are many artists whose lively hoods are already being affected by AI. There are artists who used to do book covers that have lost clients because the client would rather use AI, companies from around the world have laid off all their artists because they replaced them with AI, and there is even an animation that was released in which the background was made by AI. In the credits, it stated that the background was made by "AI + Human" because it required an actual artist to fix it up, yet they only credited them as human, not by name. This is all with the issue of copyright, so it is not really in the future - it is currently happening, which is why so many artists are fighting against AI. The creators of the AI have talked to the US government and there was the suggestion that they should set it so that artists can submit for an automatic Opt-out where it should be an automatic Opt-In (meaning that instead of having to request for your art, writing, etc not be used in the AI dataset that you would instead have to request for your creations to be used in the dataset); Not only that, in many generated images if you look close enough for some of the prompts of "in the style of" you can find that the original artist's watermark is still seen on the AI-generated image, just all messed up since the AI does not actually generate these images so it doesn't really know what to do with the watermark. Another (non-art) related issue is how companies are also already using AI or planning to use AI - Levi's stated a couple of months ago that they want to test AI-generated clothing models as a way to increase diversity with their brand; so instead of hiring more diverse models, they want to supplement them with the AI models. Granted, they said that they didn't want to completely replace the models, but there are still many questions unanswered and many concerns as to what that could open up. Many users of the AI generators have gone after creators with glee stating they were going to lose their job and a bunch of other terrible things. AI as it stands at the moment, has many ethical issues that are of course not only affecting artists but many others. And you did a fantastic job in highlighting a few of the many points!

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

AI diverse models?? Omg that’s so messed up!

@yazdhenab.

11 ай бұрын

Like I've said in my comment just before reading your, I am an author and I don't have the financials for a real book cover. I can do them myself, but this time, for this series, I wanted something original so I've used Midjourney, paid for the images and go the right to use them as commercial profit (don't worry I'm not a worldwide author, I do not win more than 10 euros per month with my 8 books) and I assume it. Promise, when I'll be rich and famous (what, I can dream, no?) I will use a real graphist for my covers, but right now, it's not even thinkable.

@katarh

11 ай бұрын

@@yazdhenab. You didn't need to use AI for that though. You can purchase the rights to a stock photo for distribution, and assemble the cover and text in a free image editing program, without the need to get AI involved. I did that for my book covers when I couldn't afford a painting. That money went to the photographer, where it belonged.

@KaiyaAquamarine

11 ай бұрын

Yeah I know deviantart (website many artists are on - for those who don't know) made their own AI system. They announced all artwork on their website currently was automatically opt-in. It took the artists rallying together to get them to change it to an automatic opt-out. But who knows how much of the current art was used...

@VaultBoy13

11 ай бұрын

"Not only that, in many generated images if you look close enough for some of the prompts of "in the style of" you can find that the original artist's watermark is still seen on the AI-generated image, just all messed up since the AI does not actually generate these images so it doesn't really know what to do with the watermark." This is a misunderstanding of what the AI is doing. It's not putting together a collage. It just thinks that something like a watermark belongs on the image about in that area from "looking" at other images. Imagine showing a child 100 images and many of them had watermarks, and then telling the child to create something like those images. They're very likely to draw in a watermark. Now, increase the number of images being fed by likely millions of images with a better ability to mimic what they've been presented. The art isn't amalgamation or collage, it's learned. It's just learning the wrong things from the images being used. And, yes, this points to these corporations using copywritten material to train their bots. Using copywritten material to train their bots without paying for it is a big part of the problem. Were artists properly being compensated for their work, they wouldn't have a problem with the algorithms. The problem isn't the AI's ability to generate art. Industrialization and automation have vastly changed the work that people do. They've eliminated many jobs, but have also created others. There's always going to be a space where artists continue to make art and get paid for it. But, there's going to be new spaces and new work that these tools open up. You should be compensated if your art is being used to train AI. But, you should also expect that there's very little that's going to stop this AI freight train.

My first experience with "AI" was a chatbot named SmarterChild. That was in the early 2000s. It was so groundbreaking at the time that my siblings and I had to convince my parents that it was an actual computer and not some weirdo who liked talking to kids. 😂

@plebisMaximus

11 ай бұрын

My first experience was with that cleverbot site. Much more A than I, but a really interesting and fun toy at the time.

@tirsden

11 ай бұрын

Nothing beat Santabot for old chatbot hilarity. He got shut down at some point way later than I would have expected, but then at some point he started having issues scrambling conversations between different users. He used to sort-of keep track of conversations before that, in the most simplistic way. Probably something in the code would save one set of words and would occasionally spit out, "Are we still talking about [that thing from earlier]?"

@evergirl1231

11 ай бұрын

I miss smarterchild

i’m so glad to be a subscriber and thankful for your videos like this and the messages you put out

i love the range of topics you cover!!!

I really appreciate how much detail Anne gave to the source material / copyright issue. Computers are NOT capable of original thoughts or ideas - they require Terrabytes (literal billions of examples) of actual artists’ works to create an average that best mimics a human’s original work. It’s just a chewed up and spit out version of the unlawfully obtained artwork of an actual human.

It's great having Anne always being the calm voice of reason in a sea if craziness. She is always so thorough and sensible

(Materials) Chemist here! I was just hoping Ann would do an updated AI video and my wish came true! From a technical standpoint, I'm not too concerned about the current state of AI/ChatGPT replacing the workforce. I've seen so much output that sounds really well-worded and convincing IF you don't already know about it. If you do know, you're quick to see it's both error-filled and lacking of an substance (lots of fluff and filler). But if you do already know, it's easier to just do it yourself rather than painstakingly check ChatGPT's output (in my opinion) From a practical standpoint, though, I only keep that level of scrutiny in my work. I don't think it's possible to analyze every little piece of information we get every day for accuracy. I know I've been known to have an emotional reaction to tweets that were later shown to be fakes. And it takes only a little bit for misinformation to spread like wildfire, and almost impossible to correct.

well done, Ann! what a clever way to illustrate your point. thanks for making us aware of these concerns.

As someone who might be replaced by a robot at work in the near future, this AI is starting to scare me

@xxPenjoxx

11 ай бұрын

Same. My job is low skill, low income, and my days are spent thinking about how poor I'm gonna be in 5 years' time.

@Chromaspell

11 ай бұрын

i dont think a lot of jobs are necessarily going to go away because of robots. half the time the general public can't figure out how to use "self serve" machines, and the other 50% of the time they straight up just break down

@giantduck8097

11 ай бұрын

@Eden my workplace is getting four robots to do exactly what I do. Those four robots only need 1 person to keep them running. I was, unfortunately, not that 1 person they decided on.

@vonsowards1297

11 ай бұрын

@@danielsolomon3794 🤦‍♂️super cringe take…. 🤦‍♂️

I'm so glad you mentioned the bias in training data! I bumped into this problem very early on, when I was playing around with image generation AI before I realized that all of them were trained on stolen artwork. I was trying to generate references for some character's faces. It easily generated some for a character who was a white girl with blonde hair. Trying to get it to generate the other two characters, who were a heavyset african american man and a korean person with some acne, was a nightmare. It kept giving me unpleasant caricatures or european features with no in-between. The korean person kept looking like various airbrushed k-pop idols, which was not what I wanted. The white girl took like five minutes and the other two took literal hours.

Always so excited whenever I see a new video from you! You've got the perfect mix of education and entertainment.

Thank you Ann ❤ love seeing your videos and I appreciate your efforts in staying unbiased and honest. Love hearing your prospective and learning from you. It's awesome watching your videos! You Rock!! Hope you have a great day!

Many artist study and learn for years to develop their own style, most of us do not want an ai to learn our style in no time after being fed with our works. I follow an artist with a very specific and cute art style, and someone just to upset her, used her work to teach an ai to draw like her.. People on Etsy sell ai art, making people who don't read every detail believe it is actual art and expect real artist to be done with a super detailed work in 24 hours.

AI is something that I was initially excited for to be getting more maintstream, like when 3D printers became more accessible. I was heartbroken when it so quickly took a turn for the worst. It's being used in such malicious ways, and even when it's used with good intentions, it's not vetted well before being implemented. Hearing about it being used as an eating disorder helpline just to spit out hurtful responses is just one example. AI could be used for so much good, and it should be. It should be used to assist people in their work, their creative processes, and daily lives. But as always, humans are abusing something on a broad scale and regulation is too slow to put a cap on it.

@RejectedInch

11 ай бұрын

because it's conceived to be malicious. The old AIs where more search type and where trained on smaller, specific, scale. Those AI were moving within regulations. These "new" AI are built to bypass regulations in order to gather as much data possible in the shortest amount of time possible, and free of any charge, licence and so on. That's how LAION-5b (Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, to name the most known, rely 100% on LAION datasets, just to give you the proprtion of how big is) managed to accumulate 5 BILION images in less than 2 years. Through the internet scraping bots and through thousands of thaousands of "users" that took someone else's work and added it manually to the datasets. Not to mention the medical records obtained bypassing data protection acts and privacy laws simply bypassing consent. AI on medical field has been deployed bypassing all mandatory trials for human sperimentation. These rules have not being broken by accident, but on purpose. Is no coincidence, if you check the resumes of those "AI bros" that they were ALL involved in the cryptoscams, NFT, Web3 etc. They go from a fraudolant scheme to another, faster than the law s can catch up.

@lilpetz500

11 ай бұрын

AI and many other technologies are beautiful and have so much potential. But commercialise it and use it for greed and profit, and it speeds up the process of the toxic outcomes that come from that. It reminds me of the industrial era; we made machines to ease the work of production and make it accessible to more people. We can now create greater, sturdier, quicker things with more human time spent on the artful aspects of them...and ended up with sweatshops and modern day slavery, churning out billions of products that weren't actually requested, and spending billions trying to tell us why we do want as many of those products we can get. The only thing we can do to stop AI industrialisation now being able to cheaply automate our thinking and crafting for us, is a massive social movement, as many people as we can get refusing to make the use of AI not profitable as it is currently being used, to force it into a humanitarian role as it's only choice besides obsolescence.

@S3anyBoy

11 ай бұрын

3d printing guns is true freedom

@PippetWhippet

11 ай бұрын

To be clear, the eating disorder one wasnt an ai powered chatbot. It was just a regular old fashioned chatbot. That doesn’t make it any better, but you can’t blame that one on ai. I think it makes the point though that demonising the technology is a distraction. Anything ai can do is already being done by other means. Ai is just the latest buzz, so it’s getting all the attention, last year it was the meta verse and the year before it was microled. Next year, we will care as much about ai as we do about whether Mark Zuckerberg is going to destroy personal relationships and it will all feel very silly that anyone cared about that specific piece of technology when our workplaces seem to think that there is still a lockdown and forcing us into zoom. Forget the tech and focus on the actual problem.

@hensonlaura

11 ай бұрын

​​@@PippetWhippet Pretending there isn't a problem because other problems will come later is naive. The problems with governments and giant companies is that they're made up of people. People are self-interested & most in their position think nothing of manipulating others, controlling what they know, to also control the decisions that they make. In the United States we've had this problem with social media online and corporate news outlets that refused to allow certain information to be published, in order that public opinion wouldn't be changed by what people knew. Dubious or false information has likewise been pushed out to the fore when it was easily proven to be untrue, but these companies ignored that; they wanted to change public opinion, public behavior. This has affected our political scene in an unprecedented way and one reason the average American is so gleeful about Twitter being taken on by Elon Musk - who will not allow censorship. I've had to leave KZread often & go to other websites because KZread will censor what is said in content! The company has a political bias that will not permit people to offend it's own agenda. They won't admit this bias, so right there I know they're cool with lying to billions of people. Likewise Facebook. When governments and companies start using AI against the people? We are going to be in the dark, just where they want us. All any of them want from us is to take our money so they can live the lives they want to live. That includes all governments & all of these major corporations. If people would just believe the evidence of their eyes and what is right before them, instead of what they were TOLD. My mother said when I was little, 50 years ago: "Don't listen to what people tell you, WATCH WHAT THEY DO." Try that.

This video is phenomenal, thank you so much for laying out the information so concisely. I'm an artist and there's a huge movement in the art community against AI art, precisely for the reasons you talk about.

This very morning, my optometrist and I had a similar conversation. His AI software is incredible but he said, in the end, he relies on his own judgment as it is TOO analytical at times and does not pick up nuances that a human automatically would. Great video!

As a 'coder' myself, I can tell you Ai is great at helping to solve issues, but you still need a fair understanding of coding, to be able to see if the response is correct, I have gotten countless issues, where I normally get the response of 'Sorry for the confusion. . . ." When I correct the AI or call it out on it's mistakes. But I do see the possibility of AI reaching a level were the responses are correct every time, and that is more worrying that incorrect answers, I believe

@Plum_bird

11 ай бұрын

That’s what I was saying. At the rate it corrects / learns these issues will become non existing. I’m not sure what the shoe-sides goal of the creators are but it’s most likely money driven. I’m worried about society on all levels.

@drakewinwest9888

11 ай бұрын

Yep, coders who think coding is safe because it’s not full proof now are clueless. We are using the AOL Online of AI on a problem that wasn’t even built specially to code, and it’s ALREADY impressive. I think it’s only a matter of time.

@katydid5088

11 ай бұрын

The other interesting question is "Once it learns one type of code, can we invent others?" When it comes to AI, the data set need to be labeled in order for the processing to even begin sorting and correctly attributing what it is working with and how it should be organized. While it gets rid of one type of job the need for others to present, change, or invent new ways to solve a problem from the ground up isn't going to leave. Add to it that error checking, especially in the early development of AI or different things like interpreting treatment recommendations or lab results, would still require a human interface with all the same pre-requisite knowledge you would need beforehand to make the determination. Humans are still a failsafe for whatever we happen to do, and some of them, especially considering the security concerns of an AI deployed recording system ect, means the human understanding of the subject at hand is still essential. The creative parts of AI, as Anne mentioned, aren't self-directed yet. Decision trees in AI basically give a "Yes or No" answer that then goes through a ranking hierarchy based on perimeters that AI sets up for itself with a human controller. The question of creating Alan Turing's "Thinking Machine" is a ways off (if the last technological doubling is anything to go by, in the next 30-40 years). This is to say that AI and Algorithmic models can't work without input. Therefore, creating a limit to data information in A.I or a more secured world where we still rely on paper inputs and other "non-tech" solutions to create something, is still remains part of our future. I would posit, than a world strictly ruled by Terminator esque robots.

@jonas8708

11 ай бұрын

I'm not super worried about that particular scenario. Even if it's correct 99% of the time (which is still way off, it can barely understand basic instructions if it doesn't have literal examples to go by,) software engineers still have to build complex solutions, talk to clients, each other, management etc. and try to balance all the needs for the product they're working on. I mean sure, if all you do is center divs all day or write algorithms thousands of other people have already written, then yeah, you'll be replaced, but I don't think anyone actually does that. E: This all goes for artists as well. Art isn't just "given input A, generate output B" and that's all these models can do

ann you're a cyberpunk hero, fighting against corporations. thank you a lot!

Thank you! I was so confused by all this. Your explanation helps so much!

11:00 ... did not think about ANY of that ... wow. Thank you.

Just the term A.I. is starting to become an anxiety trigger for me. Half the time I have to hide videos that even mention A.I. in the thumbnail now (especially the fun ones where they are especially clickbaity ones that say things like "is art DOOMED?" and crap like that" I am still trying not to completely avoid videos on A.I. because I know that if I am completely avoidant it will make my anxiety worse, so I only try to click on videos that aren't trying to trigger me. Thanks for being informative!

@stargirl7646

11 ай бұрын

My comment was similar to this! I’m glad I’m not alone - it’s rough 🥺 And yeah I clicked on this one because I knew she would probably have a good balanced take, which she did. BUT now I’m stuck scrolling the comments endlessly which is NOT helping my anxiety lol! Helpppp

I really just want to thank Ann for educating me for so long, I started watching you when I was in yr 8 now im halfway through year 11 and I haven't missed any of your uploads since then. thank you ❤❤

@HowToCookThat

11 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching for all those years Tabita 😀💕

There are few things that set my heart at ease more than a calm, thoughtful person saying intelligent, well-thought, and reasonable things about issues that matter. Needless to say, I love Ann Reardon!

Absolutely fantastic video! Thank you for doing this Ann!

Hi Ann! I really appreciate the amount of work you are putting in to every single video you make! You have inspired me to become a dietitian and now I’m studying in UNSW- doing a course you introduced to me! Thank you so much🎉 Keep on going!

@HowToCookThat

11 ай бұрын

Awesome, well done on getting in to uni to study dietetics. 💕

The difference is that AI creates nothing new, and only remixes. Therefore it needs real artists and people in order to exist, and it threatens their ability to create what it needs. It's a parasite. AI could have some really useful and fascinating uses if we do it right. I use character/./ai or Dreamily for creative writing, but it's hard to know where their training material comes from. A lot of it is my own work and it learning from me, but not all of it, and that's the problem.

@ribeyesteak9641

11 ай бұрын

but humans are pretty much the same, our brain doesn't develop without influences from around us so you uncounciously take a lot of inspiration from other things people have created

@MsVersalia

11 ай бұрын

@@ribeyesteak9641 that is completely different from a computer copying a bunch of pictures. The human mind does not work like a computer and there are many, many small decisions each artist makes every time they make a piece of art which makes them unique and interesting. AI can only produce a mathematical equation that "averages out" existing imagery

@PippetWhippet

11 ай бұрын

@@MsVersalia what you said about how ai works isn’t correct. Funnily enough though, say that exact statement to a neurologist about the human brain and they will assume you have a degree in neuroscience, because as reductive as you think it is, it’s exactly how the human brain does work on a neuron level.

So interesting! Thank you for breaking down this issue!

The timing on this was seriously perfect, as in my debating club yesterday this is exact what we were talking about. Quite an interesting discussion.

The issue I had was how some AI would take pictures from artist and manipulate them into a new image rather than learning from the images. I’m not sure if that is how it still works or if the way AI makes images now is different. Either way it’s scary to think my work as an artist could be so easily replaced by AI. It’s already an issue with people not wanting to pay artists what they’re worth.

@MsVersalia

11 ай бұрын

That's all AI can ever do, it's making a mathematical equation out of a bunch of images that already exist. Without people, the AI wouldn't have anything to copy

@cosmicsoulsorcerer

11 ай бұрын

Isn't ai art already "inbreeding" with itself?

When robots were replacing humans in manufacturing, the people who weren't being replaced confidently told the workers that there would be even more jobs than before because 'someone has to make the robots and keep them working" and that the new jobs would "just require retraining." A couple of decades later and the number of manufacturing jobs has massively decreased in the developed world and the people that were working them are now working in the service industry if they're lucky. Now we're teaching machines to think for us, and the machines that are pretty bad at that job are scaring people enough to ask these questions. Those people who confidently predicted more jobs? They're getting replaced by this stuff in 20 years. Worse, we're actively developing AI weaponry - machines fighting humans with nobody in the loop to decide whether the trigger should be pulled or not. It's like we want Skynet to actually happen.

Another two issues include: 1) Privacy - If someone uses AI to analyse "big data", does that mean that the data has now been uploaded to the AI's database and is available for future uses by that AI? That might contravene various privacy laws. 2) Indemnity - The T&Cs for ChatGPT that you accept states that the user will indemnify ChatGPT/OpenAI for all legal claims. That means that you will need to pay for lawyers to defend OpenAI and pay for any damages yourself if anyone takes you or OpenAI to court over something you've done or misinformation from OpenAI that you've published.

Such a great and well informed video. Thanks Ann for always making complex topics so easy to understand 😊

In the world art, I have noticed that the people who are excited about ai are the ones who can't draw two straight lines and the ones who are worried are the ones who have spent years of their lives working on their skills

As with everything you do, this was presented succinctly, clearly, and intelligently. I enjoy your channel so much, Ann. Thanks for this.

Thank you Ann for using your platform to educate!❤

Ann you are just a pure genius. We’ve been watching you for a few years now and wow I just am so glad to watch you talk about subjects you are passionate about. Very well done as always.

My mom was a journalist and she would edit articles that AI made. She said there would be so many mistakes! Whats the point of having an AI write if it doesnt even make your job easier 😂 Great video!!

You know, for a food scientist, you are equally a scientist of many other topics. Thanks for sharing your thorough research! I learned so much!

Best commentary/explanation I've seen on this topic.

Your thoughtful and insightful analysis is so appreciated! Great work, and a fascinating production here. Thank-you

Already in the publishing world, I've seen graphic designers and artists be pushed to the side in favor of AI-generated covers, both in indies and even large, traditional publishers like Tor. A lot of creatives are fearing for their livelihoods right now.

Fascinating information, and thank you for presenting it. Also, I have to know what color nail polish you have on - it's gorgeous!

Kiitos Käsittelit aihetta hyvin.

I absolutely love how Anne just shares knowledge with us, she does so much research!

AI might be good at some things, but it will be a long time before it can be an empathic and engaging communicator - Ann, your job is safe. As for these large language models - they are a long way from being general artificial intelligences. They have no deep understanding of what they are producing, they are essentially following statistical weights between the words in their training sets to produce the words that are most likely to follow in a sequence - not the word that is most meaningful, or even correct. They can do a lot, but they aren't smart.

Excellent Video Ann! Of all the tech videos.... your Cooking channel has the very best explanation of the challenges of AI. Especially impressive in this day and age as you seem to do so with little to no cuts. Thank you again for your brilliant educational content. Take care!

Great look at AI, very well thought out video. Love the cooking on this channel, also love how you approach every other topic with the same standards of accuracy.