7 ms·
Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman
- dqpb 4y agoThis is amazing.
- amai 4y agoEven the fake Feynman is smarter than most real people Lex has interviewed.
- 6c737133 4y agothis is fucked up manufacturing content from the voices/faces of prominent people that have died is no bueno fuck podcast.ai
- apetresc 4y agoIn all earnestness - why? It's not like anyone would be fooled into thinking this was real. What's the harm?
- Jerrrry 4y ago>not like anyone would be fooled into thinking this was real my god, are you asleep?
- antegamisou 4y ago> It's not like anyone would be fooled into thinking this was real. What's the harm? You are grossly overestimating the collective intelligence of people on the Internet and yes this also includes the "wittier" Lex Fridman audience.
- cholantesh 4y ago~~also~~ especially
- jasonlotito 4y ago> i hate Lex Friedman and Richard Feynnman That's pretty harsh.
- thimkerbell 4y agoClickbait. I was fooled by the title and would have listened. Dan, if there is a way to demote deepfake fiction, a way that doesn't cause other problems, that would be great.
- anonporridge 4y agoYou never get to close pandora's box. The only choice you have is how to decide to adapt to the new reality. Whining into the void about the new reality isn't adaptation. It's weakness.
- canucklady 4y agoThis is such an insane worldview. Lots of things are technically possible but socially or legally discouraged. You could infringe copyright. You could steal. You could walk around naked. It's not whining to say that something is outside of social norms.
- twblalock 4y agoWhen it's trivially easy to break the law and there are no obvious victims, and it can be done on computers, those rules go out the window. Almost everyone who shared music on Napster would have never shoplifted a CD from a record store. Almost everyone who shares TV episodes on Bittorrent would never have stolen a DVD from a store or climbed up a power pole to illegally tap into cable.
- rngname22 4y agoWhen it becomes trivial to 3d print gray goo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_goo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_goo) I wonder if you'll sing the same tune to humanity's destruction or if you'd admit that there's a spectrum and there's some threshold past which a technology becomes condemnable. Because right now your statement basically implies there is no such threshold (since clearly the person you're replying to thinks podcast.ai is past it).
- abeppu 4y agoI also think it's kind of pointless as anything other than a demonstration of the speech synthesis (which is getting pretty good). The Feynman character especially shows that while these models can pick up a bunch of the details about the surface style, they certainly can't be clever or insightful, which is the appeal of the people being imitated. With respect to using the voices or faces of dead people, I do think it's interesting that the estates of the deceased can have some control over commercial uses of personal images. The estate of MLK I think still controls use of the whole audio from some of his famous speeches. But my understanding is we haven't yet settled whether synthetic / derived artifacts which rely heavily on existing photos or recordings should themselves be controlled in the same way.
- ballenf 4y agoCan you imagine seeing the first photograph of a person? Like all you'd ever known was paintings and then one day someone shows you a glossy, pixel-perfect photograph of yourself. Photos didn't start perfect and neither is this black magic of recreating a person's speech patterns. Hard to imagine a world without photographs.
- Brian_K_White 4y agoThis is not a photograph. This is a drawing by someone who never saw the subject but has had the subject's appearance described to them, and the artist is not even a person to properly understand the descriptions, being presented as a photograph.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- RobertDeNiro 4y agoIs there any value to these? like its a cool tech demo, but they are mostly saying non sense.
- smt88 4y agoI think the beginning and end of the value of these is as a tech demo. At this point in the lifecycle of the technology, I don't think anyone is trying to achieve novel, valuable content.
- dqpb 4y agoThey mostly don't say nonsense. I listened to the whole thing and I found it very convincing. I've never been able to listen all the way through AI generated content before. It's hard for me to believe this was 100% AI generated.
- fuckstick 4y ago> I listened to the whole thing and I found it very convincing. Eh? "Lex Fridman's" voice is shaky as fuck in the first 30 seconds and apparently he can't pronounce science now? - it says sci-in. (It continues to be flawed - he sounds sick when he says UC Berkeley). If I heard this knowing it was really him I would be concerned he was having a stroke. His voice is defective enough that it is actually irritating to listen to. Also, the opening monologue doesn't sound much like Feynman's style - he was known for being irreverent, flippant, intense and maybe even occasionally dismissive - but not this aggressive - certainly in a sitdown interview he agreed to. Also hard to believe he would fuck up the word "interviewee". He wants to "walk"? and listen?. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA This would only fool someone that has never heard Feynman speak for an appreciable period - but then you might as well get a decent impersonator. And really the content doesn't hold up to even basic critical listening scrutiny. > They mostly don't say nonsense. Oh god dude, most of the material is false and easily verified as false from basic sources. It's mostly nonsense. EDIT: Ok listening to segment between 3:30 and 4:30 I know I'm being trolled.
- 4y ago
- djmips 4y agoInteresting. Very weird.
- xsmasher 4y agoI was interested when Feynman pushed back on the laziness of the opening question - seems like a very Feynman thing to do - so I was interested. The follow up question, though, snuck in a lie - "you went to UC Berkeley for two years." That property of these interviews seems dangerous, and likely to implant false factoids in people's heads.
- rngname22 4y agoYeah I commented on this on the last thread by this company on here, but it's like literally a demo of a fake news / misinformation machine. Content that sounds stylistically like the parroted speakers but is just factually incorrect or misrepresentative of what the speakers would likely say. I guess if the point is to demo the pure technical achievement it's maybe cool but there needs to be a huge 'misinfo' disclaimer plastered literally everywhere that it's for entertainment, although even then people could just rip the audio and repost it and pretend it was real.
- jahewson 4y agoFun fact, factoids are always false.
- ravenstine 4y agoNecessarily? I'd assume a factoid has the potential to be either true or false.
- hhmc 4y agoBy some original definition of the word they are necessarily false. Usage seems to have shifted to ‘small fact’ though
- KennyFromIT 4y agoThe common misunderstanding of the word `factoid` to mean "a small fact" is itself a factoid.
- seydor 4y agoa bit too real and now i m learning all the false factoids about feynman. I hope i never remember them. i guess if i let it play too long, it will be forever a memory. next time i watch a video of feynman i will see him as a very ramblingman
- jasonlotito 4y agoI think it's important that this makes it clear that this is fake. The title here is 100% a lie. At least, it should be "AI Generated Fake Lex Fridman interviews Fake Richard Feynman." Have some self-respect.
- Bootvis 4y agoClearly, they are not contemporaries so it’s obvious.
- dqpb 4y agoThis is the problem with "fake news" and increasingly AI generated content. From an information theoretic perspective this is a perfect title. It sounds 100% improbable, it is therefore 100% surprising, yet it (apparently) delivers what it says it does. From a receivers point of view, this message is a super-carrier of information, unless (or until) they can discern that it's fake.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- subarctic 4y agoNow that these deepfake interviews are getting posted regularly, they should have something in the title indicating that they are deepfakes / AI-generated. I thought this was an old interview with Richard Feynman that someone had found and posted, which would've been pretty cool, but instead it's just another one of these auto-generated interviews. (It being from podcast.ai was what gave it away since I saw the last one with Steve Jobs and Joe Rogan, but really it should be obvious from the title.)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- sshine 4y ago> should have something in the title indicating that they are deepfakes What gave it away for me is that there is only a small overlap in time when Feynman and Fridman were both alive. Feynman died in 1988 and Fridman was born in 1983. :) Fridman is around my age and Feynman was always a historical figure.
- fuckstick 4y agoLex Fridman was born in 1983 and Feynman died in 1988, that's more obvious than Steve Jobs and Joe Rogan since although Rogan wasn't doing much in interviewing during Jobs' life, it's plausible since they are somewhat contemporaries.
- suby 4y agoThis assumes everyone knows who Lex Fridman is. It seems reasonable to me that deepfake interviews be labeled as such.
- BudaDude 4y agoYou can also check the url. `.ai` subdomains are a pretty good indicator of the content you are about to consume.
- dqpb 4y agoIs this direct text-to-speech or is someone reading the text and transforming the audio?
- fuckstick 4y agoListen to the audio between 4:00 and 4:15 - maybe in a quiet room with headphones. That's either TTS, or a Lex Fridman impersonator with some fucked up vocal cords. You tell me what's more likely. There's also the mispronunciations for common words - words that you can easily verify Lex Fridman has no difficulty with.
- SpaceManNabs 4y agoLet the dead be dead. Read what they left us. Watch what they left us. Listen to what they left us. Touch what they left us. But if they weren't aware of this future or didn't leave any instructions on how to perceive them if such a future came about, then they should be left alone.
- thinkmcfly 4y agoI get the interest in Richard Feynman, but why lex?
- klabb3 4y agoA huge set of easily accessible training data?
- thinkmcfly 4y agoIt just seems sad to use the ghost of a guy who desperately chases pop culture/mainstream media trends to talk with feynman's ghost, and not even have it be part of some bit or social commentary
- iammjm 4y agoI liked it a lot and am very surprised about much negative comments here. The episode of Rogan vs. Jobs is interesting as well.
- comboy 4y agoSo did I. When you apply critical thinking, I don't think it matters where the insights came from, they are still valuable.