Google's image A.I. generates surreal and hallucinatory compositions

a reply to: athousandlives

Good find and the pictures are great.

I think we're creating another species so there will be many things that will not be human like but it will not be any less real. A.I. could see things in a totally different way than humans.

You might ask a human and an A.I. what does the color red remind you of. A human will say a hot summers day and A.I. might say a planet around a red dwarf with fireworks going off. The human might think that's odd but the A.I. might think the answer a hot summers day is odd. Whose right?

We're giving machines intelligence and eventually they'll become a species smarter than humans and we might have to augment ourselves to keep up with it.

In the future some A.I. could see humans as a threat because they equate being shut down to death while other A.I.'s think that's silly so they want to protect humans. When my 5 year old Nephew hits 50, things will be interesting for him if we haven't destroyed ourselves.

Those are hilariously weird.

And it's only in its infancy now...

The resemblance to visual hallucinations caused by certain substances is uncanny.

a reply to: Thorneblood
Because there is not "it". If you had comprehended the article and had have any idea about the topic itself, you would not write that. Throwing stones? More like the motto of this site, you can find it left and right to my post.

If you worked on self-learning software before, we can talk. If not, you are the one throwing stones.

a reply to: Astyanax

That's really why its so amazing. I've had this idea - call it the conspiracy theory of mind - that says that what the human mind is really all about is filling in the blanks, connecting the dots, deciding what's going on from previous experiences with only partial information. Its crazy to see an AI doing just that, because I think its a huge part of what makes us tick: If you see the front part of a parked car you can envision the whole car if you've seen cars like it before. That's filling in the blanks. Things like '___' turn it up, and it can be turned up to high, certain disabilities turn it down, so people can't imagine what will be on the other side of a door having walked through hundreds just like it in the same building. But its core, its central.

They are very, very close to the critical breakthroughs I think.

Regarding the future, all I see is Daleks combined with Cybermen.

Yeah, I'm cynical. Please explain to me how human nature and technology won't be the death of us?

I realize that's a ambiguous and leading question but I'd at least like a try at it.

Come on, who in their right minds, at least as far as the ATS crowd and the likes, thinks Google is doing anything good for humanity?

a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

I get what you mean.
Google is a massive corporation, run for profits. And it looks like it's only getting bigger and spreading its tentacles all over the place.
But that is the way our society is heading, so I try to accept it and see the positive or interesting aspects of things, like in this article.



a reply to: tridentblue

That sounds a lot like my own theory
I have heard something along the lines of that many people who have reached certain insights (either through psychedelics or other means) claim that consciousness is pretty much like a computer program or network and our brains/minds are but receivers/senders of information.
And I also believe that we are getting nearer to the breakthrough. Wether that will be used to help advance mankind as whole is another matter.

originally posted by: athousandlives

a reply to: tridentblue

That sounds a lot like my own theory
I have heard something along the lines of that many people who have reached certain insights (either through psychedelics or other means) claim that consciousness is pretty much like a computer program or network and our brains/minds are but receivers/senders of information.
And I also believe that we are getting nearer to the breakthrough. Wether that will be used to help advance mankind as whole is another matter.

Absolutely. I would love to hear more about your theory. As far the insights, most certainly. Crick's discovery of DNA on psychedelics was an example of that. The effect of these drugs is like turning up a knob in your brain, it has strengths and weakesses, turning it down has strengths and weaknesses. The crazy stuff people come up with it turned up can win in big ways though.

Donald Hoffman is a speaker not to miss, his theory is that we evolve to a sort of optimal madness, and that madness is the most effective interface with a world we do not really see. I agree with this, so seeing AI walk into the imaginarium is to me, the most important step ever.

The thing about AI is that its power. That's neither good nor bad, but it does almost always seem to corrupt doesn't it?

a reply to: tridentblue

Cool, thanks for linking that video, hadn't heard Donald Hoffman before.
His idea of what we perceive as being just an interface is what I mean.
How the eye works on the physical level, to send information to these neurons and synapses, maybe that's how the pineal gland functions on another more subtle level? Apparently it's been found that the pineal has vestigial components of an eye, a third eye as such.
So is it possible that the eyes and other sensual organs gather information from the interface, whilst the pineal can delve deeper, if properly attuned, and tap into the actual frameworks?
Deep meditation, fasting, '___', have all been linked to highly affect the gland. And experiences from all these things are incredibly similar.
By the way, typing dmt on google and searching images, some of those look like the pics of this article.

I'm also convinced that there is still so much we don't understand about psychiatry, and a lot of cases of people we classify as mad and crazy, are simply people who are attuned to other 'frequencies' of this same reality. But here take a couple of pills and go to sleep.

(mods, just making it clear Im not promoting illegal substances here, just thinking out loud )

a reply to: athousandlives

I love it! That's right, the pineal gland actually is an almost fully formed eye in some species. Maybe that's why I have a sense that this vision research is so close to the core of it all, because in that it is.

I had a very powerful "pineal awakening" when I was much younger. It was like I was suddenly aware of a new spiritual dimension of existence. It didn't come from drugs, but rather was lasting and natural. I'm pretty secular these days, but whatever it was was undeniable: It was the awareness of this underlying pattern to all of reality, as information or something. By moving awareness to the third eye/pineal, an awareness of the world around me would expand in all directions, and I became aware of it having this independent existence as information, and it could be effected through the third eye. The sense of the individual self dissolved, and I gained awareness of myself as the world I saw.

Since we know that our worlds do exist in our minds, our self as we know it (ego) must only be a sub part of our minds. So that awareness of all perceptions of self must be closer to the actual framework as you call it. But I have never done dmt.

It all goes back to what Hoffman says, that seeing reality isn't always the winning move, and that goes for "mentally ill" too: Its about the optimal form of madness, that's what the successful have. The awake states of being aren't guaranteed to be the winning move in the game of life, and that explains a lot of what we see.

a reply to: tridentblue

I've had this idea - call it the conspiracy theory of mind - that says that what the human mind is really all about is filling in the blanks, connecting the dots, deciding what's going on from previous experiences with only partial information.

For what it's worth, you just received your first-ever star from me.

The mind doesn't always work by filling in the blanks and connecting dots, but that is how we come to conclusions based on available data. It's called forming a hypothesis. An analogous (though not identical process) drives creativity, the genesis and development of new ideas and solutions to problems.

What distinguishes the conspiracy-theorist mindset is a preference for unlikely but sensational hypothesis formation and great selectivity in gathering and interpreting supporting data.

Id like to hear what Terrence mckenna would have to say about these.

Freaky deeky.

a reply to: Astyanax

Thanks for the star.

I would make a slightly different claim, though: I think we all have the same underlying dot-connecting mindset. It fills in the dots with what's most probable, based on what we've seen the most of. For instance, I see my guitar is in the room, because I see part of it sticking out from behind something, and mentally fill in the blanks with the rest of it being here. If I had experiences with my guitar dividing itself into different pieces, I wouldn't assume the whole thing is here because I see one piece. So if you have weird experiences, or read about lots of weird or conspiracy stuff all the time, you're likely to fill in the gaps with weirder conspiracy explanation than someone with a mainstream experience. But we all connect the dots in the same ways.

Weird stuff, reminded me of videos by this guy: www.youtube.com...

a reply to: wildespace

What...... did I just watch.....


lol
That's just creepy if anything