Artificial Effort

in Proof of Brainlast month (edited)


Do you remember the piece of AI art that was sold at auction for just under half a million dollars?

It was some creepy-looking guy who came to exist through a machine learning and emulation process of 15,000 portraits painted by artists between the fourteenth and twentieth century.

The entity responsible for the creation is a collective known as Obvious from Paris, France. That being said, they aren't necessarily the brains behind the creation.

Here are some statements that Hugo Caselles-Dupré from Obvious made during an interview, I'll loop back to it shortly.

“If the artist is the one that creates the image, then that would be the machine. If the artist is the one that holds the vision and wants to share the message, then that would be us.”

“You could say that, at this point, it is a collaboration between two artists - one human, one a machine. And that leads me to think about the future, in which AI will become a new medium for art.”


ai.jpg

image courtesy - Carson Arias



The AI art auction sprang to mind while I was reading @acesontop's post from yesterday about AI. He brought up the possibility for writing to be generated with the use of artificial intelligence by an author and how this poses a question of ethics when the proof of brain mechanics are considered.

It seems safe to say that not much brain power is required if somebody was to utilise AI for the writing of content. If you have a specific topic in mind and some starting material you are pretty much good to go. I'll demonstrate by dropping the sentences above into an AI content generator.

The biggest problem with working from an agenda as outlined above, however – what I would call "brain death" or when everything comes down on your plate (and it often does), where no one has time enough anymore to actually think about how they can contribute whatever their interests may be before reaching deadline – requires significant mental fortitude which will almost always come back to haunt someone after this process ceases to function at all. Some people find themselves completely useless because nothing happens but don't want others to know; those who were part-time freelancers get stuck hoping everyone likes them again by giving up without trying anyway so these sorts o f problems aris

Anyone who has a decent grasp of the English language can see some obvious issues here but overall it isn't complete horse shit.


pobdivider.png


I only used a free online generator and the sentences that I added were not particularly busting with richness but there seems to be a topic formed from the input. It is to be expected that a more sophisticated AI generator would do a better job.

Take Grammarly as an easy example, although it doesn't generate complete texts, it still modifies and rectifies writing providing some form of added brainpower.


pobdivider.png


Now to go back to Hugo Caselles-Dupré's thoughts about the collaboration between human and AI, I can see how artificial intelligence could be used by someone to generate a portion of content which could then be adapted or added to so it was somehow part man, part machine. This falls into the grey area of the ethical dilemma in my opinion and proposes that the use of technology could be used to some extent without being completely devoid of human touch.

The issue is always going to come down to how relatable and "life-like" the piece is since that's what adds to the overall human condition.


pobdivider.png


I'd much rather read content from somebody who says what they feel and expresses parts of themselves that I can relate to, or aspire to become. I like to think I'd be able to pick out this kind of writing and I hope that AI isn't able to replicate it too closely. I'm pretty sure they'd have a hard time replicating me because my writing form is haphazard at its best.

My interactions with artificially generated text are yet to be presented to me in full since they don't necessarily come with a disclaimer.

Signed,
Aeyecal


pogdividerwide.jpg


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Sort:  

This is an very interesting topic. Today I was browsing through TEDTalk to find a video to use in one of my classes, and got one about the danger of AI is weirder than we think because AI is not as smart as we think, just super efficient. Of course this is 2 years old, so probably today many thing are different from this video. I think very little about AI, but I find it interesting the synchrony of looking it up today and reading your post.
The first time I saw AI trying to create art was in screen play. I couldn't find the video, but it was very funny because it made no sense at all. You can see a little exemple in this CollegeHumor sketch or in this short film. It's not as "believable" as your experiment, but I get the point in your post.
It's crazy to think about the limits and boundaries of this subject. But I still feel that never a machine will be able to really create something as amazing as the brain can. And again we get to the point behind the name of this community: Is proof of brain related to the ability yo express true feelings? I don't know, maybe I'm diverging from the topic.

But thank you for this food for thought! The subjectivity of art is always a good topic to think about!
Keep shining!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

"sitting around a table like bad candles on a half-assed cake"

I was not expecting that from the comedy humor sketch lol. I'm no expert by any means but I know the quality of AI is determined by the data input and the quantity that is analyzed. This can only suggest that in time there will be even greater advances considering the floods of material/information that is at disposal, especially considering who the players who're using artificial intelligence the most.

I really can't say if they'll ever be able to replicate the works of the human brain, I guess it depends on what kind of brain? Computers expressing emotion is always a hot topic, you just have to look at the countless films based around it.

Proof Of Brain from my current view is partially that but also a mixture of other elements. My first introduction to the Proof Of Brain concept in the form of a platform was on STEEM but I feel like it has been a part of life for all of us since we started being part of a social environment, whether this was school, work, etc. Our exchanges and use of our brains have always had the effect of gaining or losing social recognition and opportunity. The monetary aspect of a token as form of gratification is just a by-product of the exchange and a show of agreement, respect, or vice-versa.

If the community values real human expression and authenticity, then the community will steer towards more of that. In contrast, if the community values falsity and disingenuous people, then it'll steer towards that. It all comes down to the people.

Thanks for dropping by @fireguardian, always a pleasure to read your comments.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

The main thing that makes me think that it's going to take a long time for machines to be able express in the same way that humans do is because a machine can't do a "curve". I'm not by far an expert too, but what I've seen so far is that the AI is really good at doing tasks, so you give them something to do and they will do it a lot, but always in a straight line, from the start to end. The mora data you put the more lines it can reach, but they won't go and bend this lines to create something. Of course this goes more in the art realm. And of course, my lack of knowledge can make me sound like a fool.

If the community values real human expression and authenticity, then the community will steer towards more of that. In contrast, if the community values falsity and disingenuous people, then it'll steer towards that. It all comes down to the people.

In terms of POB, I couldn't agree more. Most of the time I only think about emotions, but you are on the spot where this is something that we always done, this trades of respect , agreement and so on. And hopefully our community will always go towards real human expression and authenticity.

Thanks again for the great post!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

That is a good point, I don't know enough to say you're right though. We can just wait patiently until someone with some actual solid information comes along and confirms that we're both fools lol.

One thing we're not fools about though is the thoughts on expression and authenticity, I'll stand by that! I'm hoping that the community responds to this as well.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Interesting read. AI shows us that the world we knew can be easily transformed with data-driven approaches. AI creates arts, music and anything we can have unless there is a data. Thanks you for sharing, @calumam!

It's incredible really and not without its fair share of worries and concerns also. Another cool example was mentioned in @wiseagent's post here, which shows how AI has been used to create new music from some of the worlds greatest artists who have sadly passed. Worth a listen!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

This future we are walking into... whoa!

Thanks for bringing it to my attention


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Great subjective article... the same as people see the art itself. I have upvoted it and I am looking forward to reading more of your articles.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Very true, the essence of proof of brain at work!


Posted via proofofbrain.io