From: crude@sausa.ge
On 2026-01-07 10:51, RonB wrote:
> On 2026-01-07, CrudeSausage wrote:
>> On 2026-01-06 22:59, RonB wrote:
>>> On 2026-01-06, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>> On 2026-01-06 11:15, RonB wrote:
>>>
>>> (Lots of snipping.)
>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the the explanation of the difference between OSX and MacOS. I
>>>>> understand that the Windows problems go deeper than pushing AI, but it's
the
>>>>> AI crap that definitely keeps me from ever wanting to do anything at all
>>>>> with Windows now. I despise AI.
>>>>
>>>> Same here. On the one hand, I am quite impressed with what AI is able to
>>>> accomplish. On the other, it scares me.
>>>
>>> I'm not that impressed with it. Its "writing" is abysmal. Everything
written
>>> by AI either sounds like an informercial or a kid padding his essay by the
>>> writing the same thing in three different ways to get to the minimum word
>>> count for the assignment. It never seems to quite come to a point.
>>>
>>> Garbage in, garbage out.
>>>
>>> I like Irish ballads, so I watched something called "Fields of the
>>> Forgotten" on YouTube, I guess it's based on the Great Famine in Ireland.
At
>>> first I thought there was an actual "group" behind it, and they were just
>>> using repetitive and cheesy AI for the video. They say there's a group
called
>>> "Stone and Shamrock," but then I realized I've heard the same "voices" on
>>> other AI produced stuff. But what really turned me off (besides the fact I
>>> hate AI) were the lyrics when I listened to them more closely. Stuff that
>>> humans just wouldn't write.
>>>
>>> "Where *hungry feet* once wondered home." I can see "hungry eyes" but how
do
>>> you visualize "hungry feet?" "Rivers learned to cry." So, what exactly does
>>> a "river crying" look like? Do river tears somehow separate themselves from
>>> the rest of the water? Since the song was full of rain and a dark mood, why
>>> not make the "sky learn to cry?" Then the "wind hummed the names of the
>>> forgotten." How does "humming" articulate names? The wind also "hummed
>>> lullabies," which has the same articulation problem, but it also counters
>>> the whole mood of the song, which is dark and dreary. Lullabies are the
>>> opposite. Maybe the wind "humming dirges" would have worked. Then there's
>>> the redundancy (common in AI), "Still walk the fields again." If whatever
it
>>> is is *still* walking, how can it "do it again?"
>>>
>>> The sad part is, this song's mood (for the most part) is good. Except, in
>>> their hurry to get this posted the "producers" of this song didn't bother
to
>>> look at what the brain-dead AI produced so they could correct these
>>> mistakes. Just a few *human* edited lines and this could have been pretty
>>> good. But this is what I find in AI "writing" all the time. It stands out
>>> for its crappiness — because it's not human.
>>>
>>> Here's the link the video...
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVOesNZ8uQE
>>
>> I still think it's pretty impressive that it can do what it does at the
>> moment. When I look at how it has evolved in a short period of time
>> (especially with the Will Smith eating spaghetti video), it's pretty
>> scary what it can accomplish in little time. Still, I don't want to help
>> build it further.
>
> It's never going to be "human." Or even close.
Well, I can tell you for a fact that the pornography they're producing
with AI is so realistic (and the women so flawless), that it is
destroying the career paths of our dumbest women.
Look at that image and tell yourself that AI can make that woman do
anything you wish for her to do, even the physics will be those of a
real person.
--
CrudeSausage
John 14:6
Pop_OS!
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
