DALL-E itself was Clippy-like, blue, and bean shaped with eyes and mouth more expressive than a Zuckerberg VR avatar.
As for the family? There was none. DALL-E rendered itself on a pure black background
https://www.salvador-dali.org/en/museums/dali-theatre-museum...
I left out the bit how DALL-E also thinks maybe it's a honey badger, or a lemur with all black eyes, or some sort of sharp wood demon.
The blue one is the one that haunts me because it seems to be the most plausible
This reminds me of playing around with Craiyon a few weeks back. It seemed to think of itself as a coyote who loves soccer. Of course, the training datasets aren't going to have data on dalle or craiyon, so those prompts are going to be more based on the other words, with some randomness
Dall-E and other Image generation models are not conscious, and they aren't even intelligent. Stop anthropomorphizing them, it's not helpful. We will likely face this problem for real in the coming decades but there's no sense doing so with current models.
IF I understand it correctly :)
Asking things to draw themselves is fun, I could just as easily ask an elephant holding a paint brush to paint itself and then enjoy the outcome. That's pretty much all there is to it.
Well it's not totally made up. There is definitely something there, there is a real difference between the experience of being a rock and being a human.
The idea then of a P-zombie or some other version of a major intelligence operating with the lights off internally really is spooky.
>Asking things to draw themselves is fun, I could just as easily ask an elephant holding a paint brush to paint itself and then enjoy the outcome. That's pretty much all there is to it.
Agreed. But asking Dalle or whatever model to draw "The meaning of life" and thinking there is some kind of enlightenment in what it draws is ridiculous.
"Consciousness" can be a (fairly vague) term encompassing concretely realizable things like train of thought, the ability to introspect those thoughts, an internal model of self, etc. Humans have these whereas a rock does not, and there's nothing in particular preventing AI from eventually having these.
"Consciousness" as something incorporeal that a physically identical being could lack is nonsense territory IMO (but already heavily debated by people far smarter than me). I don't see how whatever we mean by consciousness can make no physical difference when we're directly aware of it and talking about it in the physical world.