Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
6/1/2025, 4:55:22 AM
X
In reply to:
Alex Utopia
@alexutopia
·
229d
@GaryMarcus So do we. Young artists imagine themselves capable of creating something new, but every master knows, all we do is copy patterns, combine and rearrange them.

That's what intelligence is. How else would it work? Magic? Divine inspiration? There is no original thought.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
229d
Ever wonder why diffusion models seem like plagiarism machines?

That’s because they are.

They don’t think originally about art, they just do a fancy version of interpolation.
Chomba Bupe
@ChombaBupe
·
230d
A diffusion model isn't coming up with new images by intelligence but by sampling interpolated images from the distribution covered by D, it can't extrapolate outside that distribution.

The output is effectively a blending of many different images.

The statement engages in a discussion about the nature of creativity and originality in art, particularly in the context of AI models and their ability to create art. It challenges the notion that all artistic creation is merely a recombination of existing patterns, suggesting that great artists go beyond simple interpolation to create something new and original.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not use harmful language and maintains a respectful tone, contributing to a constructive dialogue. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by challenging a viewpoint and encouraging deeper consideration of what constitutes originality in art. [+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by addressing the ideas presented without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]