For me it's even the audacity of a computer scientists giving theological ultimatums to a major religious leader. Like bro... Have an ounce of humility ? Next you're gonna explain bread to the French ?

We use the same words for two different things, so they are the same now. I am very smart.

The keyword here is "ontological." Even if AI can make elegant images, those images have no meaning *to it.* There is an element in artistry related to technical skill, but the main purpose of art is to express meaning. When you see a painting and think about what the artist is trying to say to you, that only exists because of our shared experience living human lives. A machine can give you the techniques, it might even be able to arrange them in some "meaningful" way sort of like an art encyclopedia, but it cannot express *its own* meaning. Don't get me wrong, a LOT of artists will continue to lose work because of AI, but what's left will be the one's who use it as a medium to express their hearts.

As a post said in response to the pope, this is the church preparing to be the "vault of humanity." The Catholic response to AI has been the most coherent, the most compelling. (and hat tip to @stevengberman for the great point)

Hard to take seriously the philosophers who deny personhood to unborn babies but apply it to AIs.

why are the ai thoughtleaders even arguing with the pope why is that an important battle of authority for them

Just ban it! Just ban AI. We don't have to do this, none of this is inevitable, and we could just ban it tomorrow if we wanted

Here's a great example. The Pope makes a claim about an "ontological difference" and a secular respondent doesn't even understand what he's talking about, only capable of thinking in terms of functional distinctiveness.

I do not understand is why AI hasn't had more significant social or economic effects. 40% of my life is the same as pre-AI. >80% for a lot of people. wtf is going on? we invented widely accessible AGI. should have hit like a wildfire on an uninhabited continent without lightening

are you indian or jewish? those are usually the ones dickriding ai

In this era of artificial intelligence, it is becoming urgent to distinguish human art from what machines produce. There is an ontological difference, even before an aesthetic one, between art and what a machine can generate through statistical calculation based on millions of images created by others. Algorithms lack the spark of humanity. For this reason, the Church wishes to renew an alliance with artists and cultural institutions to safeguard our humanity.

Why is this an achievement? Why is this legal? Why are we allowing individuals to create something that will be deployed to deceive and manipulate vulnerable people? The culture of Silicon Valley is fundamentally anti-human. Anti-life. It's disgusting.

Am I the only person who thinks booking a flight is incredibly easy and takes 5 min tops? Why is this the use case everyone defaults to, not just OpenAI

Everyone's an artist until they run out of tokens Truly the shittiest timeline

This should be banned.

yeah, because our current human systems ALREADY have people’s grandmas getting scammed out of their retirement over facebook with little to no recourse. it’s called pattern recognition. “it will all work out in the end if we just have faith” is not noble, it is either failure of pattern recognition, failure to update in response to evidence, or simply not caring about consequences to people other than yourself