News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Stable Diffusion is a big deal by kergonath on Wednesday August 31, 2022 @12:22PM (#32664455)
> Human consciousness and thought processes aren’t “just” anything (math, electrical impulses, etc.) — the fact is, we don’t know what the brain really does and how it’s connected to our conscious experience, or even what that is!

There are a lot of things we don’t know, but it is not magic. There is no discussion that artificial neurones don’t have much in common with the real ones, which are very non-linear and much more connected. But in the end it’s all electrochemistry.

> Neural networks, despite their name, don’t model the brain.

But that’s not directly related to my point. My point that even in the case of a ML model, you cannot get an exact reproduction any more than you can get from a human’s memory. In one case it’s scrambled somewhere in someone’s brain, in the other on a hard drive but the difference is not really relevant. Subjecting an AI’s production to the copyrights of all the things it’s been exposed to is very similar to subjecting a painter’s production to the copyrights of all the painting they have seen.

Re:Stable Diffusion is a big deal by throwaway1851 on Wednesday August 31, 2022 @10:05PM (#32670980)
> “There are a lot of things we don’t know, but it is not magic. . . . [I]n the end it’s all electrochemistry.”

That’s an element of a belief system you may choose to subscribe to, not a fact. It can’t be a fact because there’s no way to prove or disprove it.

> “My point that even in the case of a ML model, you cannot get an exact reproduction any more than you can get from a human’s memory.”

Not quite. ML models can and do memorize and regurgitate near-exact features of the inputs. It’s not the goal, but it happens.