[ExI] Computers are changing humans

Fri Oct 21 00:30:29 UTC 2022

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/oct/16/dune-subreddit-group-bans-ai-generated-art-for-being-low-effort
And this article makes an extremely good point. What if went the opposite
way and limited people in an absurd way, would their efforts in any field
be evaluated differently because of these artificial restrictions?
Yes, there is a space for that and it is usually a kind of side road show
where somebody is chained upside down and is going to shoot an arrow with
their mouth or something. But it is just a form of entertainment and not a
serious way to make humans compete with each other. Competitions should be
all about pushing our limits and seeing what the most trained, motivated
humans can do in a given field. Using AI to enhance ourselves should be an
essential part of that pushing the limits.
Giovanni

On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 5:09 PM Giovanni Santostasi <gsantostasi at gmail.com>
wrote:

> " And it’s not just happening in chess. Humans are starting to take their
> cues from machines in many other creative endeavors: Grammarly assists
> writers, DALL-E 2 makes art, AI writes code
> <https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/09/technology/codex-artificial-intelligence-coding.html>,
> programs design clothing
> <https://wired.me/culture/design/your-ai-generated-clothes-are-trending/>.
> Perhaps one day we won’t compare natural-language programs with Didion
> <https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/language-ai-don%E2%80%99t-know-no-grammar> or
> music-composing software with Bach
> <https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/12/14/155416/deep-learning-machine-listens-to-bach-then-writes-its-own-music-in-the-same-style/>,
> but the other way around."
>
> Exactly. I started to play with DALLE-2 and Midjourney and I can see how
> the lazy way to use this tech can produce interesting to look at, silly or
> whimsical results but if you want to create something really amazing and
> make new forms of art it requires a lot of work and time (even if the
> process of creating is streamlined for sure). It can be done with AI art
> and this opens incredible possibilities. This should be a group where we
> envision these things and embrace them. I don't care if a person won a
> chess competition using AI assistance (in particular if they did it in a
> way that implied some kind of "merger" with the AI). Good for him. As I
> said the challenge is how can I use AI to do the best work possible in this
> field. Why not art competitions where you use AI as much as you want? Let's
> see how the results compare. Same with chess or anything else.
> I don't see the problems at all if not in the imagination of people that
> think this is a problem.
> Giovanni
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 4:58 PM Giovanni Santostasi <gsantostasi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The solution is not obvious?
>> It is time to allow in competition human-AI collaboration. The challenge
>> would be then how this can be optimized where one player is better than
>> another in using AI together with his own skills and understanding of how
>> the AI works. I'm pretty sure that a human-AI combination can be better
>> than only humans or AI. This is the future anyway, in particular when neuro
>> links would be common and widespread in a few years.
>> It is the same thing I feel any time use of drugs in sports is called
>> cheating. I agree that very dangerous drugs should be forbidden but not
>> because they help performance but because they are dangerous (I'm sure
>> there is a dividing line somewhere there).
>> This is a transition time where we still hope to separate what is just
>> human and what is "artificial" but that separation is artificial anyway.
>> Soon that transition will be over and we will be the AI anyway. Then what?
>> No competitions or sports? I don't think so.
>> We are already using AI to train chess players so why not let them use it
>> during a competition?
>> Or any human can go to these competitions use the AI in a very
>> noncreative way and have zero input in the process (so it would make
>> competing meaningless) or some humans will figure out how to work together
>> with an AI and be better than anybody else and that would prove a point and
>> be very interesting.
>> I don't understand this idea of making the competition more fun and fair
>> by limiting the available possibilities a modern human has at his disposal.
>> Would a match of soccer be more fun if the players had only one leg? There
>> are Paralympics and they have a place but weirdly enough in these Olympics
>> prosthetics can make you run faster than humans with normal limbs for
>> example.
>> So let people do whatever they want within the only limits that make
>> sense that is they should not damage themselves or others.
>> Giovanni
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 4:27 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> *On
>>> Behalf Of *Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 20 October, 2022 4:07 PM
>>> *To:* ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>>> *Cc:* Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Computers are changing humans
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 3:22 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <
>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Interface hipsters, any suggestions?  NO dammit I don’t intend to try it,
>>> but I want to suggest it on an internet chess forum.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am surprised you make no mention of female anatomy, how a player with
>>> that would have ready access to something motorized that fits down there,
>>> and how some such players - if found with it - could try to pass off
>>> wearing it during a match as a mere focusing aid, pretending it had no
>>> ability to communicate (which capability is already available in certain
>>> models) or to host a computer.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Or just use a hearing aid.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Adrian I thought of that, as did pretty much every chess player, but
>>> declined to comment for lack of knowledge on how such a device located way
>>> you implied could have a workable I/O system.  One can fairly easily
>>> imagine the O, but not the I part of that notion.  Ladies here might not
>>> wish to comment online perhaps.  With regard to a hearing aid, same
>>> situation: I see how it could communicate in the device-to-human direction,
>>> but I don’t see how the human to device channel would work.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The chess online community of course is in mourning for what appears to
>>> be the long-anticipated end of the road for tournament chess forever.  I am
>>> among those who conjectured on this 20 yrs ago.  Chess forum participants
>>> are gleefully enjoying use of the terms “chess tournament” and “vibrating
>>> anal beads” in the same sentence of course, something none of us expected
>>> we would ever see.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Adrian, if a technologically sophisticated swindler wanted to create a
>>> perfectly covert small computing device in which the I/O requirement is
>>> very small, how would it be done?  Anyone?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> spike
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> extropy-chat mailing list
>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20221020/8563905e/attachment.htm>