3 ms·
How does one distinguish between what some call "hallucinations" and creativity?
by MangoToupe 1y ago
How does one distinguish between what some call "hallucinations" and creativity?
- rbanffy 1y agoHallucinations is closer to being wrong as a human. At any point in time, we are sure of several things that aren't.
- jmsdnns 1y agohallucinations is when we dont like it, creativity is when we do
- fusionadvocate 1y agoYou rather have a hallucinated driver or a creative driver coming your way?
- yard2010 1y agoHell, I don't want any AI driver coming my way.
- MangoToupe 1y agoI'd rather have someone I can hold liable for their decisions, tbh.
- jerf 1y agoThe article is about image generators. Image generators specifically work by starting with noise and then refining the noise into an image. That's not how driving software works and this is not a relevant point.
- fusionadvocate 1y agoSorry, I failed to follow your reasoning. My comment had nothing to do with "driving software", it addressed the parent post by posing the question a different way.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- add-sub-mul-div 1y agoTemperature settings will not get you to David Lynch.
- 77pt77 1y agoCorrect. Increasing the temperature will probably result in something that makes more sense that Lynch's output.
- MangoToupe 1y agoYes, because the thing we look for in art is... coherence?
- mock-possum 1y agoIt’s one thing, certainly.
- ticulatedspline 1y agoHallucinations are just lies one believes, and there's definitely overlap between creativity and lying but hallucinations tend to not have the conscious component of lying. categorizing the difference with AI it's much the same as with a person, context. if you ask a person what's the capitol of Florida and they tell you "Pink Elephant, and the capitol building is a literal giant pink elephant with an escalator up it's trunk", my how creative, but it's a lie. But you press them and it seems they genuinely believe it and swear up and down they saw it in a book. Now it's a hallucination, though is it creative if they believe they're just regurgitating the contents of a book? technically yes but the creativity is subconscious. Now if you asked the same person to make up a fictitious capitol to a fake state and got that answer you'd say it was creative, and not a lie or a hallucination since the context was fiction to begin with even if the source of that creative thought comes from the same place in both instances. If there's no objectively correct answer and not a copy of an exiting known then it's "creativity". The biggest difference is hallucinations are rare in humans, above we'd probably assume the person was being flippant, or didn't know and was a pathological liar (and not a very good one). We don't associate those motives or capacity to AI though, the AI genuinely seems to think that's right, that the response is coming honestly, thus we categorize all factual errors as hallucinations.