I don't know what the advantage of using VR would be. You can certainly create realistic 3D CAD models right now and the person driving the keyboard can take you through it, cut cross sections, zoom in and out, with the result shown on a big projector screen. I suppose it might serve some gee-whiz factor for selling clients if they can be immersed in it but I don't see it serving an engineering purpose. Seems like a solution in search of a problem.

What a bunch of malarkey, one off production has always been a smaller subsection People pay for uniqueness today just the way they did in the past , only now there are a lot more people, and therefore you need to punch out more mass production.

The whole "check out my YouTube" video part totally invalidates this post, though I agree with the premise.

My guess is AI will do to internet what interstate did to American road-trips. Paraphrasing Steinbeck here, “American interstate highways have made it possible to travel from one side of the USA to the other and not see a single thing.” In Kentucky? McDonald’s! California? McDonald’s! It’s the next evolution, taking local character and human interaction, trading it for comfort and convenience

Museums are full of otherwise mundane objects from past eras. Its not just the best of the best examples of high culture that are worthy of museum display or archeological studies. A lot of very mundane items from our era will end up in a museum someday. These are items which connect us to the human experience. Society has generally become much more individualistic over time. Earlier periods were much more conformist and technology frequently set people free to socially experiment.

I am in the art business. AI Art is going to disrupt the art business. But its not going to somehow end art. If anything its going to free up artists to push further experimentation and allow humans to create things that were just not possible before. A lot of art has gotten stale and boring and has been popularized by wealthy coke heads who see it as an investment and then want to pump it up like a stock portfolio.

No one has a clear definition of art. Everyone has their own version of it. To some, it is the idea of taking established skills, and showing them off by creating pieces of art. To others its creating things which somehow connect to humans on an emotional level. AI art is very quickly doing the first one but the second one is going to be the challenge. AI is far from an expert in humans and the human experience.

For AI to connect to humans, on a human level, is going to create a drastically different world.

But technology causes people to break through and create new art. The commercialization of photography disrupted the art industry, which then pushed the world of art in the 20th century to extremely new places. This AI art will probably do the same. It already allows people to make quick and dirty digital portraits in various styles.

Art is an extremely difficult thing to do. Even for competent artists who are well 'skilled'. Creating intriguing work that humans take interest and connection to is very difficult. People have different tastes. People have difference experiences. There is a big difference between a rendering and a piece of fine art.

This is a great post and one I found a lot of comfort in. Thanks OP.

Dude made shit video with a low effort, generic thumbnail and posted on so many of my subs :(

[removed]

Cement is one of the most carbon emitting materials on the planet. I hope there will be other better materials to 3D print with.

You know your channel’s dead when you gotta use a reddit bot to promote it 💀💀💀

I never signed up to be an individual. I just want the easy life like all lifeforms before me. Path of least resistance please!

I will not debate the thesis. I will admit that every blog post using the premise of "The latest advancement in neural nets brings us one step closer to the Singularity" begins with an eyeroll of dread from me, but I will at least pick apart the first section for problems, which hopefully will be informative for those evaluating for themselves how seriously to take this person.

>Intelligence, as defined in this article, is the ability to compress data describing past events, in order to predict future outcomes and take actions that achieve a desired objective.

The first two elements of that is the definition for any model, which is exactly what both AI and deterministic regression algorithms all do. I think "take actions" would imply that AI model either makes a explicit recommendations, except that no premises are given in the definition for which there is context to give recommendations (to whom? for what?). Regardless, it seems to me less of a definition for "intelligence", in any useful sense, as it is of "model".

>Since its introduction, the theory of compression progress has been applied to a wide range of fields, including psychology, neuroscience, computer science, art, and music.

The problem is that Schmidhuber 2008 only exists as a preprint and later as a conference paper -- it was never peer-reviewed. The paper seems to justify that it is a widely applicable concept, but it wasn't apparent to me on a search that the theory was actually applied by someone to one of these fields in some manner that was substantial. I'm not saying it's a bad paper or theory, but that this essay doesn't really justify why it brings it up so much (particularly given the very limited definition of intelligence above, and just the way ANN are known by everybody to work), and giving a real example of it being useful would have helped.

>The equation E = mc^2

For the newbies out there, this is what's called a red flag.

The next paragraph actually helpfully links to Towards Data Science's page on Transformer, which is actually really good in that they illustrates, complete with animations, the mechanics of ANNs. So definitely check it out. The next sentence linked in the essay, however, is literally linking the paper that defined Transformer with the defining phrase used in the paper -- as if that would enlighten the reader of the essay somehow? The final sentence of the paragraph is once again a completely generic description of all ANNs ever.

>The weights that define it’s behavior only take up 6GB, meaning it stores only about 1 byte of information per image.

This is completely the wrong way to think about it if you're trying to understand these things, so I hope he actually knows this.

The next few paragraphs seem to be ok descriptors. Then we get to here:

>With just a small amount of data and scale, the model will learn basic word and sentence structure. Add in more data and scale, and it learns grammar and punctuation.

First, this is the connectivist problem/fallacy in early AI and cog sci -- the notion that because small neuronal systems could be emulated somewhat with neural nets, and because neural nets could do useful biological-looking things, that then the limiting factor to intelligence/ability is simple scale: more nodes, more connections, more power. Obviously this wasn't correct in either ANNs or BNNs. Further, in this paragraph he seems to have lost track of whether he was talking about the objective function in ChatGPT. Either way that's definitely not how any NLP works at all. Unfortunately this paragraph only gets worse. It's disappointing, since the preceding paragraphs had otherwise indicated to me that the writer probably knew a little about neural nets in practice.

>Just last week, a paper was published arguing that theory of mind may have spontaneously emerged

PREPRINT. Not published. No peer review yet. I won't comment on the paper myself as I am not a peer in the field. It's a dramatic claim and it will have proper evaluation.

This is all I'll do of this, as it's a long essay and I think there's enough that you all can judge for yourself from what I've evaluated of the first few paragraphs.

Right now, no. In the future, yes. I like the idea of humans working with AI architects and building engineers to build and test buildings in VR space where they have unlimited creative freedom. The systems can also then have individual components for the buildings produced in 3D printing factories so when the build time is ready a lot of it will be assembly vs human made bespoke pieces.

The construction industry is extremely resistant to change though and this would need to come from outside startups.

I think it could be good for design in the sense of looking at how a finished product will look in a more human perspective, but for the actual design really all VR does is make your camera angle turn with your head and that's not super useful for most things. Your plain old monitor and mouse will be just as good for design. Better software is really a lot more important than if your interface is monitor/mouse vs VR/VR stuff.

VR is really just a display and input technology. It doesn't add much ability to computers that isn't there with a monitor and mouse. If you had head tracking software that moved the monitor image with your head you would get most of the wow factor of VR just like that.

I worked at an engineering company doing IT. I don't see how VR would help them. It's a lot of number entering and checking measurements against other records, dual monitors are nice and many still use paper and have to do field work and then bring that data into the design tool like AutoCAD. Soo VR seems like it would just get in the way of multitasking so bad it would suck for most real productivity uses. Like if you think about how most any office works.. VR sucks for that.

I think it would be hard for someone to communicate if they didn't learn at least one language!

Jannies!!!! This has nothing to do with future tech and science.

[removed]

[removed]

Wanting to be able to do things yourself makes you a “Luddite” now? You tech bros are corny as hell.

If I remember correctly science has shown us that it’s much harder to learn languages once you get into your teen years as the brain starts to use different circuits which are also not as effective so that it becomes frustrating to try to and turns off, like most of the population from even tryin to learn. That said, making it a university requirement to have a second language to get into say, electronics engineering was frustrating, especially since most high schools (in 1970’s bc Canada) made you take French in grade 8 if you wanted to go into sciences and electronics engineering etc. Of course some people would say that if you can’t handle learning some French, then why are you going into fields that require massive amounts of learning, but I say, if most peoples brains make it uncomfortably difficult (by forces of biology and evolutionary processes), which are out of your control, to learn a second language, then that’s just a part of our screwed up culture and requirements of some non-technology types of people who have naturally ensconced themselves into university admissions culture and who studied literature, language, culture and think everybody should be able to easily learn the same. The other annoying thing is that the rule was that after the first weeks, most discussions in the class would not be English but French, so if you were a slow learne, you’re screwed.

Are you saying the transformer has brought us no closer to AGI?

There was nothing more "original" about people before today.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=vr+in+construction+industry&FORM=HDRSC4

ive already seen various live subtitling/translation things in early development, it really isnt that far off

I had an interesting conversation with ChatGPT about the idea of "semantic compression".

Imagine if popular TV shows were broadcast not as video, but as extremely detailed instructions to an AI model, which rendered the experience as if the model were a codec.

There could be knobs you could adjust during the inference. Like, "Make all the actors naked" or "Less graphic violence please!" Or, "I really don't like that guy's voice. Make him less annoying. Or, just write him out of the show, actually."

The AI model could inform you, "That change will have a significant impact on the narrative. Are you sure?" With enough changes, you'd be watching something completely different from what everyone else is.