Are we entering an age of sorcery?
old.reddit.com
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” -Arthur C. Clarke As AI/AGI develops further to possibly create stuff...

Using a simple text prompt I can immediately generate any kind of image I want. It’s not that much different than a wizard casting a spell.

Yeah, especially if Q* and other AIs can be based in mathematics so it can invent new things that actually work.

Even a simple LLM is a window into the Jungian collective unconscious at time of training, but nobody seems to talk about the philosophical implications of what we have right now.

The Age of perfect robo wives.

For normal humans yes, for those that merge not so much.

There’s websites showing how you can build technomagick circuits with batteries and leds and sigils / potentiometers. I don’t know how it works or if it does but there’s a lot on it. Lucifer Faust shamanic technomagick is a book that teaches you actual magick devices you can make I believe.

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    28·
    1 year ago

    We are entering a brave new era of table knocking, quakery, seances, and generally buffoonery.

    I hate trying to assess what llms are even doing. Half the people who know enough about llms and “ai” don’t know anything about intelligence or language so they might have some kind of idea about what the math is doing, but they’re obviously stuck in lala land when explaining what that means in terms of cognition, or even if the stupid things can in any way manipulate abstract symbols.

    There are so many true believers, hucksters, truth seekers, snake oil salesmen, and wierdos. Now bing apparently has an integrated ai buddy and god knows what it does.

    And i’m extremely skeptical and i want nothing to do with ai “art” , and i’m worried i’ll get left behind as people jump on it and start building tools around it whether it works or not. : p

    • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
      7·
      1 year ago

      Half the people who know enough about llms and “ai” don’t know anything about intelligence or language so they might have some kind of idea about what the math is doing, but they’re obviously stuck in lala land when explaining what that means in terms of cognition

      as my college proffessor on machine learning used to say “AI has literally nothing to say about cognition we sometimes use the language of cognition as a metaphor but it’s not what we do here we’re statistical modelers and anyone who thinks we have anything of value to contribute to neuroscience is an arrogant moron”