While Herndon applied lipstick and Dryhurst packed a diaper bag, I sat alone with Link in the living room, administering a bottle of milk. As he turned his head, he looked first like one parent, then like the other—a quality Dryhurst called “heridescence.” I thought about the ways that parenthood forced and foreclosed on multiplicity. What was more of a fork than a baby?... [Later, at the gallery, s]trobe lights periodically illuminated three large heaps of compost, flecked with humus; a machine puffed artificial fog. Speakers played recordings of a compost pile.... The sounds of worms and microorganisms at work emerged as the honking peals of a saxophone.... In a side room, a sheaf of poems, printed on edible paper, sat on a spotlighted pedestal. Visitors were invited to eat them. It was hard to know how to be. “Let’s go somewhere else,” a small child said to her father.
What was more of a fork than a baby?
26 comments:
Machine learning is a nonlinear model of a supplied pattern. Are humans more creative? Some would claim that we are not.
Once you become fixated on climbing ladders, forks become inconvenient.
Some of the AI art is actually super creative. It's just like a calculator in many ways. Good data in, good data out, bad data in....
These modern America variations on Norman Rockwells are amazing, and hilarious. Proof positive that it's less about the AI taking requests, and more about who is making the requests and how they're being made.
Some of my favorites:
https://imgbb.com/F402zHn
https://ibb.co/kMvHVmb
https://ibb.co/CBKvvqr
https://imgbb.com/Y3G6r83
https://ibb.co/sw4XgGh
"What was more of a fork than a baby?"
Pretty obvious. They're both an implement with two or more prongs used for lifting food to the mouth or holding it when cutting.
What was more of a fork than a baby?
Well, for starters, an actual fork. Even a spoon is more of a fork than a baby is.
And don't forget the heridescence of the spork!
This is not art.
"Let's go somewhere else."
Lol. Reminds me of the supposed 2nd Grader's book report "This book told me more about penguins than I want to know." ( Thurber, maybe?)
I tried to read it - I couldn't make it. I googled her - all of her photos show her looking vacant or pensive. Perhaps she is a product of AI.
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth of
diapers and vomit and crying all freaking night long and dashes to the er and
begging seriously sketchy folk to babysit and...
Then took the other, as just as fair,
and fell off a cliff
"... a quality Dryhurst called “heridescence.”"
Is that a pronoun? Don't wanna use a new word wrong.
Vegan Leather Harness FTMFW!
n.n:
Are humans more creative? Some would claim that we are not.
I've read a number of those types of articles over the years and they all fail to provide coherent reasons why.
Humans don't require another human to tell them what to create before creating.
AI will sit there like a rock until instructed to do something. That's not creative.
A baby is a junction. The opposite of a fork.
Heridescence is a pretty nifty neologism, though. I would be deeply impressed if that were the product of an AI entity rather than the author's own mind.
Althouse writes, ”What’s more of a fork than a baby”
Strange as it seems, there is a possibility that the writer is not totally wigged out. Perhaps this is an example of deficiently understood technical jargon applied outside its proper context. Because of anti-trust legislation and various contractual restraints the UNIX operating system, originally the property of Bell Laboratories or AT&T (I’ve forgotten which) rapidly evolved into different code versions that were effectively though not legally proprietary to the various entities in the computer business. Lawsuits flew like a scatter of frightened birds. A chart of UNIX’s evolution looks like a sultan’s pedigree. So, which of these 500 harem girls was your mother? Things got to the point that supposedly independent for-profit companies are required to charge big bucks for operating systems nobody wants or can even use on modern hardware. The wild growth of UNIX versions came to be called “forking” and the versions themselves “forks”. The only commercially significant version today is Apple’s macOS, which is a fork of a supposedly “free” version published by UC Berkeley. It’s all very confusing. Apple skirts the issues by not selling it. Supposedly, macOS only runs on Macintosh computers, though Apple avoids opening that can of worms by turning blind eye to the fact that it doesn’t only run on Macintosh computers.
In the server market, the domain formerly owned by UNIX and it “babies”, the dominate OS is Linux, which has a completely public-domain kernel originally authored by the Finn of whom I’m a fan, Linus Thorvalds. Linux spawns mutually compatible forks like a parthenogenic rabbit that are free to use and modify, yet makes money somehow and thus the Internet just works.
Thus very little is more of a fork than a baby, if you squint and ignore technical jargon misapplied by artsy-fartsy writers who are justly infamous for their impenetrable nonsense.
Before AI, making music became a lot more accessible in the early 2000 because digital recording tools (like Protools) were suddenly affordable. Before Protools, you had to save up lots of money as an aspiring artist to be able to record a short demo. You also had to be a passable musician because you couldn’t just squander hours and hours in the studio when it cost $125/hr or more. The effect of this democratization of music was not, unfortunately, better music — just a lot more. It turns out that there were more people who could play an instrument than people who could write a good song. A side effect was that there were no more bands, just ‘acts’ outside of a small number of genres like Heavy Metal.
Subsequently auto tune made even singing accessible to people who can’t sing. AI tools are just another step. No need to be able to perform anything at all. Not even to write a song because the models can predict what harmony will come next. But of course, music (like all art) needs to be a mixture of the familiar and the new. That’s what AI itself won’t give us — creative genius. By definition ML models can only generate what could follow in this context and sound about right.
The real problem then isn’t the established artists being copied. Rihanna will be fine. Sting is a wealthy retiree. The real issue is that kids won’t want to try to write a tune to woo a lover, cry over one they lost, or just to rock out. And without that, they will never learn how to do so, and creativity will be stifled. Pop music will become an endless flood of blandness. There might be the occasional gem but it will be impossible to find.
I've pulled out an excerpt. As you should guess, the idea of a "fork" comes up elsewhere in the article. I don't like to quote too much, but I can see I should quote a little more, so you don't think the piece is totally insane.
Prior to the baby/fork remark, it says:
"In conversation, Dryhurst described Holly+ as an “abstracted fork” of Herndon’s identity—in open-source-software development, forking is the act of copying source code and then changing it."
So Quaestar nailed it. Interesting.
Spork? SPORK?
Surely you meant fpoon.
Maybe its that a baby's genetics is a random mixing of the parent's DNA and there are many possibilities or "forks" as to what assortment the baby will get. When the baby becomes actual, all those possible forks collapse into one single instantiation. As a parent that is a very important fork in your road ... you will come to love this one very particular person out of all the myriad that were possible before.
The kid is saying the AI inspired artist has no clothes.
What was more of a fork than a baby? Tuning forks and babies are both resounding noise makers. To me, that makes more sense than a "forking" family of AT&T computer operating systems.
Classic thread if only for the reading comprehension LOLs.
Man, we are so forked.
Kind of a Hey now. Like the first time I encountered All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
Post a Comment