Seen a bit of a rise of those sort of people since moltbook or whatever it’s called emerged, trying to sucker people into believing the random bullshit generator is sentient or cognizant of its assets in any way.

What’s worse homie said “nu-uh” it’s not statistical probability and then proceeded to describe a statistical probability mesh.

Might help a bit if we all stop slapping the AI term on everything and start calling things what they are such as scripting, large language models, cronjobs, etc.

Trying to argue with those people just makes me sad and tired :(

I feel like the soccer player does look more like his real life counterpart (Virgil van Dijk) with DLSS off.

I always wondered why samsung phones and tvs had that "vivid" high contrast color tuning turned on by default that just blows out the contrast and saturation. I thought surely no one actually prefers this kind of look. Reading some of the comments on here and on youtube, now I understand.

You're right that there is an internal representation for tokens and token sequences, but they also do copy. There is a whole area of research on this, and here is an example article on extracting image datasets.

They do build a representation of words and sequences of words and use that representation to predict what should come next.

A simplistic representation is this embedding diagram that shows how in certain vector spaces you can relate man/woman/king/queen/royal together:

The thing is, these are static representations and are only bound to the information provided to the model. Meaning there is nothing enforcing real world representations and only statistically consistent representations will be learned.

Realistically the artists working on it have a say into what graphics settings are allowed, and they already deal with the fact some people will need to run on very low settings, also affecting their ideal viewing conditions. If the newer DLSS really makes such sweeping changes they would either ask Nvidia for improvements, disable it, or heavily dissuade it.

But player autonomy is also important, so it's a balancing act. If the players end up wanting it and you take it away from them, it still won't make sense to strip it out at the end of the day.

Only artist intent matters. Personal preference be damned!

What of the agency of the players? Who will be sitting in the room and impacted, if this optional feature is enabled in the privacy of one's home? Will the artist, halfway around the world suddenly wail and fall over in pain because of personal preference?

I guess it's the same as when people put steak sauce on a steak, and all the chefs who love the taste of bloody meat cry that the meal has been ruined... Except they're not the ones eating it. They can enjoy their own creations however they like without getting all nitpicky about how others have their own preferences.

Not art, realism.

Yeah, but you know what will happen, all of a sudden the games will become amazing and everybody will want to play. All of them 😁

Unrelated to the AI

What’s up with his chin? The chins off center and then the beard is even more.

Implying that it’s the only thing that matters is dumb. If you want uncanny valley faces, go for it. I’m not interested in dumb AI permeating yet another corner of my life.

The self aggrandizing of the edit is priceless.

they could never seem to get past the cartoonish look.

Lmaooo I will stick to turning down all the settings on my shitbox computer because apparently that's the same experience hahah.

That's like saying that no ai image can be realistic, because it was ai generated.

but if you’re going to criticize them, please do it accurately

You should take your own advice.

They do know the meaning of words, but only in relation to other words.

That's only one part to meaning and it's the only one LLMs have. It's facinating what this one part can do, but we don't operate this way. LLM have no world model, no logic model to associate a word to. It doesn't think, it's still just and input - output machine.

It’s not a statistical thing like word frequency pattern.

Instead, they’re doing math on words in a several hundred-thousand dimensional array where placement on this grid indicates the meaning of the word

I'm sorry, how is this not statistics?
The training is by it's very nature statistical. We give millions of text inputs with expected outputs and tune the model until they match. How is this anything but statistics??

It developed this array via training on terabytes of text, but it’s not storing a copy of that text, nor looking it up, nor copying anything from it

Yes and no? Yes - it's not storing a copy of the training data in the text form. No - it most definetly can "memorize" text, if that's not a copy I don't know what is.
I could memorize foreign script text without understanding it and then I could recreate it. Did I make a copy? no. Can I make a copy? yes.

I wouldn't have called this generative AI, but Jensen did. Great for stills, uncanny valley for motions. People are claiming it generates completely new images, but in this instance it keeps the same geometry and texture and just processes motion and color vectors to create a hyper-rendered version of the characters.

Ignoring the obvious problems of the hardware it requires and supporting the AI bubble feeding monopoly that is NVIDIA, it is interesting technology that doesn't actually seem to act as a medium for IP theft, my beef with what I call AI slop. It might only be practically good for photo mode in games, but it will be interesting to see how it works out. It could kickstart interest in making Let's Play in a more Machinima style.

Well there is an off toggle.

You still pay for it 🤷

Going to go with 0% consistency and characters flipping between multiple faces

Saying that an LLM knows words is not a value judgement. It doesn't mean "LLMs are sentient" or "LLMs are smart like humans". It's doesn't imply they have real world experiences. It's just a description of what they do. That word has been used to describe much more basic kinds of information / functionalities of computers already. What makes it so offensive now?

There is a reason they start to fail when trained on other slop; because they don't know what any of it means!

If you taught children slop at school they would not get far either. Although training LLMs on LLM output is more akin to getting rid of books and relying on what teachers remember to teach the students.

The importance of that weight comes from humans. It is not intrinsic knowledge even after training.

It comes from the llm and not from the outside, that's what intrinsic means. How is it not intrinsic knowledge? I think you mean to say without humans to read it, an llm's output holds no inherent value. That is true and nobody is claiming that it does. llms don't derive pleasure from talking like humans do so the only value llm output has is from the the person reading it.

Their 'knowledge' comes from the basic weights of what word is most likely to follow. It is pure association, and not association like you or I do word association.

llm weights are anything but basic, but regardless, this is also true and lunnrais said as such:

They do know the meaning of words, but only in relation to other words.

The difference between human knowledge and llm knowledge is that an llm's entire universe is words while humans understand words in relation to real world experiences. Again, nobody is claiming those two understandings are equivalent, just that they exist.

Also on the point of statistics, I think the way people understand statistics and the statistics used in llms are vastly different. It is true that an llm finds which word is most likely to be next, but how it does that is not a classical statistical method. An llm itself is a statistical model. When one says an llm 'knows' or 'understands' they mean it has captured abstract information in a incomprehensibly complex neural network not dissimilar to how we do it. How it can only use that information for word prediction doesn't change the fact that it has captured information beyond what is present in a word prediction.

It seems to me that 'statistics' is often brought up to devalue llms by associating them with basic statistics. This association is wrong as I've explained in the previous paragraph. And themselves being a statistical model doesn't mean their ability to express knowledge (although limited to textual domain) has to be inferior to a human's.

I understand the need to warn people of the limitations of llms. Their limitation is that they are text models with no concept of real life. Not that they are statistical models or copy paste machines

Even simply using the word "know" is anthropomorphising them and is wholly incorrect.

You are suffering from the ELIZA effect and it is just... sad.

They don't "learn" anything, though. They're 'trained' (still a bad term but at least the industry uses it) to spit the correct answer out.

People, especially CEOs and advertising firms, need to stop anthropomorphizing them. They do not learn. They do not "know". They have statistically derrived association and that's it. That's all.

Holy hell ELIZA effect is in full swing and it's beyond sad. They don't build the association themselves. They don't know what the representations mean. They absolutely do not know why two words are strongly associated. It's just a bunch of math that computes a path through that precomputed vector space. That's it.

Yes, the artist's intent is the part that matters in art.

Yes, it looks bad regardless of the tech behind it.

That's impressively bad

The only thing aibros love more than ai is their own farts.

I didn't use the word learn, although that's really just a matter of semantics. I said they build a representation of words/sequences in a vector space to understand the interplay of words.

You can down vote me all you want, but that's literally just the math that's happening behind the scene. Whether any of that approaches something called "learning", probably not, but I'm not a neruoscientist.

I don't know how to tell you this, man, but videogames aren't realism. They're art.

Nothing says 'I don't care if you downvote me' like editing in a George Orwell quote to cope. lol

Computers have been getting anthropomorphised for a long time. Why is it only when talking about llms that you start clutching your pearls about it? Why do you think that verb has to be exclusive to humans? To me that seems like a strange and inconsequential thing to dig your heels in.

And I struggle to see how you could genuinely believe I was suffering from 'ELIZA effect' after reading my comment. You need more nuance and less absolutism in your world view if you genuinely do.

That's a fine opinion you have there. It reminds me of "Only the chefs taste matters during a meal"

You have no idea what your are taking about.

Dunno whats the beef between you guys, but its healthy to see and interract with people who have different opinions than you.

Blocking people just because you think they are douchebags because they have different opinion just makes you live in a bubble where you hear only things that reinforce your own views.

Your eagerness to fool yourself is beyond sad.

Why is it only when talking about llms that you start clutching your pearls about it?

I am of the opinion now, and this is entirely AI's fault, that for the collective mental health of our society, a grocery store self-checkout should not even be allowed to "thank" you for your purchase.

Why am I ordering from a chef if I don't like their cooking?

It invents light sources for objects that don't exist. This is generative.

My problems with AI, by the way, are faaar beyond IP theft.

This reminds me a lot of the Smile EQ comparison that speaker sellers would make to impress average, 45-year-old men in Best Buy.

In the Grace picture alone, it removes the distant fog, it destroys the mood, it overrides the art style, it over-brightens the scene, it adds light sources that don't exist, it removes the warm light spilling out of the shop window, it makes the color palette colder, it hyper-contrasts everything—there is no world in which I would call this an improvement.

She is a nervous, FBI desk lady who's never seen a day of action and stutters while giving case reports. Compared to Leon, she is an ordinary person. The filter makes her look like any star on The CW.

If you think games are more about realism than art, I'm afraid you're the one who has no idea what they are talking about.

The uncanny valley is more a product of designing for "life-like" over things like "cute" or "endearing" or "emotionally expressive".

Meaning, we can already cross the uncanny valley, and this AI filter will not help with any of it.

I don't understand why anyone paying attention is giving nvidia any money at this point. It is abundantly clear they don't give any fucks about the consumer GPU customer. They will charge you $1000 to sell you to OpenAI as soon as that baffling sentence somehow becomes possible.

Some games have realistic graphics, some have stylized graphics, some have no graphics at all.

You can call them art or fart, the fact is realistic graphics are becoming better with the help of ai. The technology makes them better. Even the technology you don't like make them better.

Not everyone finds realism in games as the desired end goal of videogame graphics, and historically stylized graphics age better.

It certainly is using generative AI methods given Jensen is calling it that. People have their own issues with things, but IP theft is the biggest for me given it shows the disturbing amount of leeway people developing have been given to break the law.

Players: all we want is consistent frame rates and affordable pricing

Nvidia: best I can offer is uncanny valley filter. That’ll cost you double.

That's a funny comment. Did I say they do?

Most gamers enjoy different genres in all kinds of styles.

How so? You can avoid buying games with yhis feature