4 ms·
Do you find it at all ironic that you wrote this comment likely without having read the article? Sorry but your brand "I'm going to boldly make a statement wit
by laborcontract 3y ago
Do you find it at all ironic that you wrote this comment likely without having read the article?
Sorry but your brand "I'm going to boldly make a statement without reading the article or addressing any of the content in the article" is polluting this site and it's tiresome to have to wade through it on HN.
Kling has written publicly for over a decade and a half. What assertions do you disagree with?
AI may have given people the ability to be armchair experts about anything but armchair critics are a tale older than time.
- dale_glass 3y agoI've read it, my take: It starts well, then quickly goes off the rails. AI can be creative: I agree actually, and IMO AI is just another piece of evidence that the specialness of humans is a tad overblown. And in the end it matters little how a task is accomplished. A calculator doesn't calculate the way we do, yet it still adds. So by the same token I have no problem with the idea that even if an AI is nothing like a brain it still displays creativity. AI is not Google on steroids: Why not? It's a quite flexible tool capable of different tasks, including writing code, poetry and answering questions. No reason why it can't be used as a better Google. AI can understand you as an individual: That's where it's just complete BS. Modern models don't keep persistent state. They don't form human-level connections. That may come in the future, but as far as I know, just isn't a thing yet.
- yellow_lead 3y agoSadly I did read it.