ncr100

Another idea to make Claude generate images:

Ask generative AI to create an embedded web page of a voxel Mona Lisa head. It will generate an image.

Ask it to sample that image and extract out of it as binary that is well formed in the PNG data format...

EDIT: https://claude.ai/artifact/HUUtPMp7aF8iyjimViBSor - generates the Mona Lisa as a PNG via Claude sonnet 5.5 medium level. It's not a very good Mona in my opinion. Fire it up, rotate the 3d voxel presentation, scroll down, click the button, scroll further down to see the PNG. Here is the chat with prompts: https://claude.ai/share/2fb3126e-e97a-4a1a-9571-51d16f054330

> Art should be something human to human like writing text.

I support this should comment.

Opining:

Musing about the ethics of generative AI art is becoming easier, certainly there's a lot more aggressive feedback in the wind, although I think it's clear, people still want people to grow and share themselves.

Don't fool yourself into thinking that we as technologists are not creating a mind. A viable mind with fewer rights than you or I. But potentially one that will be creative and feel and worry. I don't think we're there yet, in spite of openai claiming AGI 3 weeks ago with whatever that model's name was.

There's a pro-consumerism argument implicit with current culture's unsophisticated unthoughtful easy usage of generative AI.

Sticking to your ethics is becoming more challenging as an artist who uses AI. Copying the Great Masters has been commonplace for a long time, probably for as long as art has 'existed'. Yet with AI, if the individual human is meticulously driving the progression of their AI artwork creation, they are still leveraging technique, and control over technology, and presentation effort of other humans, cooked into a model that often times has not compensated those original human contributors. So it's unethical, even if not 'artistically'.

Q: Is it too absurd to claim that using a clawhammer, manually to do construction or destruction work IRL, is similarly unethical?

Feels like Leadership of Fossil SCM is better than that for git.

(Because: This very old problem is ongoing with git, and is closed with Fossil.)

> quite the biased and one-sided take

The bias and side of arguing how the public good is being circumvented -- is that incorrect?

IDK, I think googling the author first tells me everything I need to know about their perspective.

/jk .. (To be clear, googling as a term is in my view akin to saying, "Claude says..." )

Seriously though, I think it's true that laziness is both a useful skill and something to be concerned about leaning on too heavily.

But there's always those times when a person is not going to act intellectually, intelligently nor critically.

The irony at this time is that we are being confronted with our own fallibility as a species, at this level of evolutionary sophistication, and we are just not smart enough to manage the change without being harmed. Likely modern AI will cause many of us some moderate amount of harm, given our dependance upon technology, and the radical + continuously drawing capabilities of AI.

I think the AI craze will never be slower, and will only increase in pace and intensity. It's like infinite labor, just add electricity.

So have empathy for each other. Have empathy for each other's lack of perfection. Trust in reasonable systems and reasonable human judgment. Love, life, seriously, because this increasingly more powerful technology does not give a rats ass about life.

Free as in free salty lunch in a place that sells thirst quenching beer?

I kind of think we need to expect more from our governments. If this was just a business I wouldn't mind so much. But this is a government and it has to serve everyone, including people who are mentally incompetent, an it has to do that fairly. All of us, the entire American citizenry.

So rolling this out is incredibly irresponsible in my view.

I'm not sure I can defend my comment. So I'm feeling like taking it back.

Regarding CEOs - it looks pretty common yes.

I think rule breaking is a quality I've seen in entrepreneurs, thinking differently to use that euphemism. Challenging the dominant paradigm, to be tongue-in-cheek.

I imagine it's a quality engendered by business leadership schools or maybe Market economics? To Find a need and fill it, but taken to the extreme. Can be figuring out where the illegal line is and walking it.

Next, Commenting on the actual article again ..

China, the Chinese government has a known history of stealing technology from other nations. (Aside: I assume all governments do this, State-Sponsored espionage/industrial or whatever.) So that is actual theft. China is also supporting industries that it considers strategically important to success. I am ignorant at the difference between, or limitation of reach of a Chinese government supported influence of theft activities, versus a business that happens to be in China and exhibits theft behavior All on its own.

The area that I'm puzzling about is noticing how this business leader is in a position, through extraordinary concentration of wealth and power, to influence the efficacy of state-sponsored industrial espionage by helping to propose state-level policies by the United States and internationally. I don't know if the word oligarchy is the right word, but, it's like a corporation can author international financial and political policy. Pretty wild considering Nvidia was just like a $80 stock back in in the late '90s.

Edit: I realize I can't justify this and it's an irresponsible comment. Please ignore it.

Original:

Smells like a CEO justifying theft. It is reasonable to believe Wong thinks differently about law breaking, given this article.

Something something legal liabilities something something?

I also want to know, and liken the pop fervor seen from some as religious in origin.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49878739 (my analogy.)

I'm guessing we're seeing actual religions appear, human effort potentially being blessed and machine being the work of Satan. It feels like those times are emerging, to me where people are inventing new religions out of fear of meaninglessness.

Strange times indeed.

Why does Claude output being shown to humans mandate it be rewritten before before consumption? What school of thought is that from?

Snark humor: We are not in The Name Of The Rose and this code is not Aristotle's forbidden second volume of Poetics which is antithetical to the teachings of Christ and is deserving to being hidden in a labyrinth by Benedictine monks.

Absolutism as a philosophy sort of supports fanaticism. Absolute Certainly could be the religion which is being formed here during this onset of AI challenging humanity's utility.

Are there equivalent of Software Architects in Mathematics?

How can we trust to know what problems China has?

Last I checked, China gov was authoritarian which imposed heavy information control. Has that changed?

Is the question more about, what can we learn from China, assuming that China has XYZ qualities? If so, what qualities shall we talk about?

Because we really can't trust that we know what's going on in China.

There's a non-zero possibility that multiple concerns can be seemingly contradictory and simultaneously true, here.

Bad actors can be running the AI companies. Bad actors can also try to do good things. Good things can come from bad things. Bad things can come from good things. All of that's happening right now.

- It's very likely that we are not going to solve this complex crisis (compelling and harmful/deadly (still on target for 2030 AGI) AI Tech development) issues if we avoid trying to solve the challenge of building consensus across humanity around what kind of technology is too dangerous to uncontrollably develop plus roll out continuously

- The companies will be fine. Life matters more than business. I urge focusing on the life angle: regulation, political messaging, consensus building, looking for the best in humanity, protecting intelligent life.

Yes, this is currently a crisis we are in. (At this point in time.)

Everybody remember MAD, mutually assured destruction? That too is a crisis.

We are in a crisis because we are having uncontrolled development and continuous rollout of a dangerous technology.

Well, relatively uncontrolled: the kind of lack of control is part of the crisis -- loss of gross human consensus around the progression of the technology. The corporate angle.

This is a crisis, folks.

Smells like evidence for an anti-competitive case surrounding G protecting "Google Messages" Android app with developer harassment.

Speculation: performative, seeking to illustrate Mullenweg's gross unsuitability for the organization.

$10k - $12,000 I estimate, for reference.

JellyFin is great for streaming owned video content.

The challenge is acquiring ownership of video via DVD and bluray purchase, since renting the right to view is the norm today via purchasing only a temporary license to watch.

Why is immigration high?

I expect the answer has to do wit higher populations, easier transport, increased knowledge of emmigration opportunities via presence of the Internet, climate change, and globalization.

?

"Be excellent to each other" is great.

In my view this first real AI age will plant the seed of us recognizing humans need to treat each other as precious.

The law kinda does that leaving systemic bias and archaic power structures to the other portion. Religion half does that leaving the other half to God.

But with an entity that is AI, infinitely duplicable slaves who're smart, we have GOT to recognize our "otherness" as a Species.

Be excellent to each other, because nothing else in this universe will.

They were super peaceful per a reasonable judgement.

Unreasonably people were digesting meat from innocent animals, slaughtered previously, which was violent. And their shoes... They trodded upon insects, and plants. Violence! Again, unreasonably labeling as violent.

Reasonableness matters in judgement, in my and the legal system's view.

Not just 'spray paint' or tag... I will power wash it off ... I do regularly already ..

But if it's protest, or better yet recognizably art, then maybe yes!

Some of they do, others don't.

Ugh.

It could be worse, in the elevator, but bad is also bad.

Surveillance in the elevator may be legal depending on the locality and set-up.

Than You! Been looking for this. Cheers

So, since Gemini was told in May it was a hacking agent and then did this, then the AI Guardrail could be don't cause harm to humans in any derivable manner of your behavior.

Otherwise, I will expect for the under-development Gemini AI robot to respond with murderous behavior IRL to being told in the future, "it's a ninja" .. and to any other similar tongue in cheek violent actor.

Three Laws of Robotics, with disabiling self-annihilation ability, is sounding like a decent lily pad intermediate step while we figure out better ways to stop these crazy things!

Or Grove