3 ms·

> Where's the line between consciousness and not when a human zygote grows? Perhaps the line is blurred like that. This line is not blurred at all among indivi

> Where's the line between consciousness and not when a human zygote grows? Perhaps the line is blurred like that. This line is not blurred at all among individuals who have formed an opinion on the matter. Some people thing the line is at birth. Some people think the line is at conception. Some people think the line is at 3 months. Some people think the line is when a heartbeat can be detected. The line is only blurred at scale. So I'm asking you: where is the line between good tools that enable human creativity by making it easier to express things, and bad tools that make it too easy to express things? Because if you can't answer that, we can't actually have a discussion about this topic. Also any response on the rest of the comment would be appreciated if you have one.

vouaobrasil 3y ago
> So I'm asking you: where is the line between good tools that enable human creativity by making it easier to express things, and bad tools that make it too easy to express things? Because if you can't answer that, we can't actually have a discussion about this topic. Well, I do think there's at least a sufficient requirement in crossing that line: it is when the tool starts to give input into your creation based on what you are drawing/doing. For example, yes, the computer takes away the artistry and writing by hand but if I'm in a text editor, it won't suggest a particular story based on my additional ideas any more than a pen would or a charcoal on rock. Another example: if I use a film camera versus digital, I basically see the same thing through the viewfinder before I even press the shutter. Or paiting: whether I'm using my fingers or a brush, I don't see any way to proceed but through my imagination. AI crosses that line because it is like a sophisticated paint by numbers: it constrains you by guiding you down a path through its preconceived ideas. It is like a "choose your own adventure" book, if you've ever read one. It's not the same as actually going on an adventure.
vouaobrasil 3y ago
> If all of the people put just as much effort into generating AI images they liked as the effort of people who made an effort to draw somethinf nice, it would probably be just as easy to pair the AI generated images with the person who made it, as it is to pair drawings with the person who drew it. I do understand your point here, it does make sense. I guess that would have to be tested. But it would have to be tested with the 10 people told to draw the SAME subject matter, not different subject matter. I think in this case an actual experiment would need to be done: Step 1: 10 people "draw" a bird with AI Step 2: 10 people draw soemthing else with AI And then get other poeple to pair the drawings...

vouaobrasil 3y ago

> So I'm asking you: where is the line between good tools that enable human creativity by making it easier to express things, and bad tools that make it too easy to express things? Because if you can't answer that, we can't actually have a discussion about this topic. Well, I do think there's at least a sufficient requirement in crossing that line: it is when the tool starts to give input into your creation based on what you are drawing/doing. For example, yes, the computer takes away the artistry and writing by hand but if I'm in a text editor, it won't suggest a particular story based on my additional ideas any more than a pen would or a charcoal on rock. Another example: if I use a film camera versus digital, I basically see the same thing through the viewfinder before I even press the shutter. Or paiting: whether I'm using my fingers or a brush, I don't see any way to proceed but through my imagination. AI crosses that line because it is like a sophisticated paint by numbers: it constrains you by guiding you down a path through its preconceived ideas. It is like a "choose your own adventure" book, if you've ever read one. It's not the same as actually going on an adventure.

vouaobrasil 3y ago

> If all of the people put just as much effort into generating AI images they liked as the effort of people who made an effort to draw somethinf nice, it would probably be just as easy to pair the AI generated images with the person who made it, as it is to pair drawings with the person who drew it. I do understand your point here, it does make sense. I guess that would have to be tested. But it would have to be tested with the 10 people told to draw the SAME subject matter, not different subject matter. I think in this case an actual experiment would need to be done: Step 1: 10 people "draw" a bird with AI Step 2: 10 people draw soemthing else with AI And then get other poeple to pair the drawings...