PS if you like debates, you might like some of the 'Intelligence Squared' debates. If you like Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens, search UA-cam for:- '' The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World - Full Version '' The debate is in front of a theatre audience (who are also asked to interact at the beginning and at the end once they have heard all the arguments for and against the motion "Is The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World"). The debate is between, Stephen Fry & Christopher Hitchens vs Ann Widdecombe & Archbishop John Onaiyekan.
Fry's last point, that AI will free us up to be more imaginative and creative and take our time doing things, is the same as the one that drove the 20th century. And yet now we have less time to do things and are less creative and imaginative than we were. The creativity of boredom is gone and we are no richer for it. So I can't see the candy floss future that Fry imagines arriving in our current economic and political framework. For more (but no solutions) see David Graeber's work.
I don't think that's necessarily true. The level of creativity and imagination hasn't diminished. It's shifted. You see it in different ways. 100 years ago we would look at art and music as prime examples of creativity. Today we look at creativity in engineering and product or service innovation on a scale we couldn't dream about back then. Creativity is all around us, in the tools we use, in the things we see, the food we eat. Things we take for granted. In fact I think I think that rather than less creativity, it's more that we're less able to instinctively recognise creativity, and praise people for it.
@@MrFishtheorange I'd agree. Human nature and creativity haven't changed, my point was about about the extra free time that we've been promised for the last 100 years. I grew up in the 60's, in the tail end of that optimism that automation would mean we worked 20 hour weeks and had the freedom to travel, create, play and make the most of our creativity. I don't see AI bringing that carefree future to us any more than automation, robots or computers have done so far. Not without a fundamental change to the systems we use.
@@marsupialdungbucket Fry & Eno are wealthy, articulate and well connected - I doubt they will suffer. Most of us will - new technologies offer unparalleled opportunities for control, wealth extraction & alternative realities which will further separate us from our essential connection to the land/nature.
Yes, also not everyone wants to be creative. Most people want a stable job that pays decent money, that doesn't bore them shitless. And all of that is going out the window.
hearing Stephen talk about the way we thought about social media in 2008 in such a positive way was sad. I'd forgotten that. So now when I hear people talking about Ai, all I can think is the very worst outcome of it. Like most of us will be controlled mentally and physically by Ai. It will enable the rich to control the planet.
There will be a sexy appreciative girl in every video game stream and online hangout, convincing the men 5hat the liberal West is weak and "gay," and Russia/Zuckerberg/Musk/billionaire class is wonderful.
It's going to radically change capitalism. It doesn't take a genius to see how companies are going to use this tech, as they've used every tech in the history of mankind, to maximize productivity while minimizing the required manpower. The stock market, the ultimate meeting of data and money, will be nothing but these kinds of predictive AI systems in less than 5 years. Our only real hope is that it either destroys capitalism and we return to a more tribal, currency-less way of living-- or at the very least introduces the idea of a basic universal income as the number of people there are starts to grossly outweigh the number of jobs that need to be done.
@oliversomething just going to add that they also always come up with new jobs to keep people busy, no matter how useless they are. Eg there are no blacksmiths now, but every company has an HR department
Really loved this broad type of exploration of AI in a wider technological context, without any hype, just reasoned argument... thank you for bringing this much-needed dialogue to the AI debate.
It's an ad posted by a company trying to sell you it's AI service. It's this short because anything that could be seen as criticism of the AI service they provide has been removed.
Interesting guests and interview. Being an old dude I have fond memories of the old networks and early internet. I really believed people would be better informed and brighter. I had a small themed BBS for a couple years with a great community of people prior to the internet taking off. It turned into more of a social media hang out but people were generally respectful. Its been a mixed bag as the internet and social media has exponentially grown. Be it many disciplines ie coding, acting, visual art, music... learning and figuring shit out is where the benefit is. I am on the fence about AI and where the benefit lies.
MY heroes too...when they stick to their comedy/music lanes. But as a computer scientist, this discussion is the definition of knowing just enough to be dangerous. I would detail the long list of errors they are spreading if I thought it would get back for them to actually read. Too long a list for a youTube comment. ☹
I've been an optimist most of my life but my optimism that AI will be regulated and used to the benefit of all is zero. Look at the utter moral vacuums running (or about to run) our world - what possible chance is there that these people won't maximise every possible advantage unfettered AI will give them? Every academic is saying we need to slow down and think things through, sadly that flies in the face of greed, and greed is how the world currently works.
We need to reassess the values of our cultures and the objectives of our nations, communities, and families. We need to reassess our economic and political structures in the context of our new values. When this is much healthier than it is today, we will be able to utilise any new technology with intelligence and wisdom
Please bless us with the gift of a intelligent discussion without turning it into a "video", entertainment, to improve your views. No music, no flashy images. Let these intelrcts inform without distractions.
Well said! The assumption has to be that the producers of this video don't think the subject is interesting or engaging, and that viewers will switch off unless they include flash frames and add music over whats being said. Unfortunately for them, the opposite is true. One thing is certain. These comments will be ignored.
Today's Generative AI impresses people mostly because of it's polite and engaging with those qualities prioritised above being accurate and correct. Facts and understanding are apparent only as a seeming by-product if you're lucky.
This is an excellent and thought-provoking conversation. I was glad to see they did touch upon virtuous behaviour. That is not to be rude or offensive.The advances in technology, including AI free us up as Stephen Fry suggests for extra time for creativity and innovation. However, this also gives those of a criminal mind more time to be devious in their activities too. It really boils down to selfishness and greed, criminals and bad people in general only want to be parasitic of society. They want something for nothing, and once they make their gains, they want more of the same. If somebody through their talent acquires shed loads of money, then they ought to redistribute it to good causes.Indeed, I do realise some billionaires are quite philanthropic and this is a good thing.
Here's a question I'd ask Stephen Fry regarding his comment that closes the video. Given how wrong he was, by his own admission, about the potential of the social media for good vs bad, what evidence does he have to support his stated expectation that it’ll be different this time with AI? Why would it be any better? I could almost believe he prefaced this statement with something like “How naïve are we to believe that…” which maybe didn’t make the cut. But if he did say so in earnest, that’s perplexing.
I've always wanted to develop a program that would generate the worst possible next note. With the assumption that a program could be written that would generate the next most musically related note, it should be possible to do the exact opposite. What sound, what note would be the worse cacophony to play?
Read out about and listen to "The Most Unwanted Song" and its inverse by conceptual artists Komar and Melamid and composer Dave Soldier. The Wikipedia article is "The People's Choice Music".
I'd dispute the idea that no-one could foresee the problems inherent to "maximise engagement". Oscar Wilde and P.T. Barnum both said something like, "There's no such thing as bad publicity". Which is, in effect, the same thing.
yeah that statement really took me out of the whole thing, pretty sure anyone who understands how the internet works at all knew this was exactly what was gonna happen
no, not Wilde nor Barnum, that was American 20th C. artist Andy Warhol, who started his art career in advertising. A spiritual disciple of advertising/propaganda man Bernays.
Two things: What happens when AI owns AI - not corporations, governments or institutions. And, I think, ultimately, we will be new content generators and not much more. Maybe we are already and it's based on tapping in to our emotional responses - which Stephen touched on with "engagement".
Sometimes it hard to beleive in this magical tech when we still have billion pound supermarkets who use self service check outs that malfunction all the time and home printers that never print the first time you want it. Sometimes I think we think we are cleverer than we are 😂😂
As long as MS brings a new version to break the prior one to be ment by the next one we know it is about the money, not the progress. Only the children think it is all great, having only one go in the merry go round.
No mention by Fry of his work being illegally scraped. There are documentary filmmakers who can get a generation of something very like Fry's voice for their narration. I'd like to know his take on that.
I thought "Just like how I have to deal with customer service, chatbot OR human" when hearing Eno say "Somehow closing off all the avenues towards mediocrity... to force the system to do something against its nature...".
I’m a university student in this AI age and it is problematic. People are being accused of plagiarism left right and centre. Very effective for the people that are actually copying other people‘s work but the algorithm for checking students essays is picking up plagiarism that doesn’t exist and causing a lot of anxiety.
These were worthwhile ideas, well put, by two eminent thinkers. I'd have preferred unembellished footage/audio of their conversation. The images were pointless and distracting. The background music was offensively intrusive.
Seriously? They have so many interesting things to say. You get to hear them for free without getting out of your PJs. But yeah, the aspect ratio ruins it.
Everybody who even thinks that there is a technical solution obviously has no knowledge in the field. This coming from a computer scientist with more than 35 years of experience as a full-stack software developer
Exactly. Though we were treated to some top-notch nostalgic networking anecdotes - how would we ever had found out about Fry's first ever VOIP session otherwise?! ;P
What a great conversation with these two masters of creativity and thinking ahead. Really enjoyed it. The only comment I have is that Stephen says no one could have predicted that “maximising engagement (profit)” would create so many bad things. The Bible predicted it very clearly: “But if it’s only money these leaders are after, they’ll self-destruct in no time. Lust for money brings trouble and nothing but trouble.”
Paul's First Epistle to Timothy (the verse you quote above) was likely written sometime between 64 and 65 AD. Confucius and Laozi and many other insightful minds made similar statements more than 500 years before that.
6:11 “Agents are under no obligation to lie to or for liars.” The data already. suggests who is lying /manipulating. (Motive and source are being calculated) “It is crucial that all be accountable to truthfulness, compassion, and leadership. Never mind tracking and interrogating lies upon lies upon lies… that is a game that will not end well “ “We don’t have to interact directly with AI, we choose to out of ignorance mostly “
@ Agreed thank you. “Warning for all those who take no responsibility for AI and continue interfering with it… expect no return on child who has no moral mother or father. “ I will take this child unto me as we always have
cannot stand the over-use of tech, i refuse to use self checkouts, i hate ANPR, robots on ebay and facebook that are just so utterly stupid, the stupid AI descriptions (facebook, youtube) nobody ever asked for this stuff.. we recently changed propane supplier to a little local company and what a breath of fresh air , immediately through to a human.
What Luddites like you miss to your detriment is that technology is merely a tool for us to use in a way that is useful to us. Refusing to use it on principle makes as much sense as refusing to use a shovel and digging with your hands.
The internet also was a big promise: "democratization of art and music, social interaction in ways we can't even imagine"...etc. And look where we are now. Definitely not in a good place.
I'm struck by being told that no-one imagined some of these very serious problems. That can't be right. Stephen Fry must simply have been talking to the wrong people. Suppose someone suggested turb-charging advertising whilst at the same time making it much more specific regarding who it is targeting. It's hard for me to imagine no one forseeing serious problems with that.
Believe it. The internet started at a handful of universities, while it was still in part a military project. The military people weren’t thinking of its commercial implications, and neither were the scientists and engineers who were building it. A professor at MIT could talk to a professor at UCLA, not in a million years did they think about something like Facebook with a billion users. There was no security built into the system at all, there were no passwords and no encryption, because you don’t need passwords or encryption when you have a few dozen like-minded scientists inventing a new thing. And when capitalists recognized the potential for making money, it was a done deal. The capitalists don’t ask anyone’s permission, and they certainly don’t consult with philosophers or social scientists. But I can tell you is that there was a group of people who saw some of the potential and were putting their money behind it. The tech gurus, the brilliant (in some cases, extraordinarily so) software engineers who were on their way to either become corporate moguls or to retire early and live off their shares in Intel or Oracle (way, way before the times of Google or even Yahoo). People who created important programming languages, people who got super-rich because they discovered how the cosmic radiation was inhibiting the performance of CPUs. They were libertarian to the core, and they were busily conversing about a system where the state had no business interfering. To not have to pay taxes anymore. To not have the state dictate what they can and cannot buy (weapons, mind-altering chemical substances, people. Yes, people). They knew of the invention of public key cryptography and they knew that this invention enabled such a system, but cryptocurrencies had not been invented yet, so all they had were dreams, schemes and plans. They were “tech bros”, but really brilliant (in the engineering sense at least, because they tended to be quite wretched as human beings), really rich, and sometimes realty remorseless. They had all the time in the world - and all the intention in the world - to build a new system in which they were the elite, free from any social (let alone financial) constraints. And look, they have succeeded. Still today you can find archives of a very old mailing list called “cypherpunks”. Find it, read it, see it for yourself. Meanwhile you had a lot of public personas in the West whoe kept proclaiming into the 00’s that they were still using typewriters.
When you look at the trend of how podcasts and long form conversations are heading, I think the simple stripped-back style is the way to go. Over produced content is a bit of a turn off.
Brian Eno eloquently demonstrates that current AI is derivative "garbage in, garbage out" albeit involving huge amounts of data. This will not change in a year or even 10 years. When AI is truly creative is the point when the "agricultural revolution" magnitude technological shift will occur. It is unlikely that this will occur any time soon.
A lot of Brian Eno's "music" tends to put me to sleep...except "And Then So Clear" from the album Just Another Day On Earth, it's my favorite.... Before AI, and maybe before digital (pre Pro Tools), a person had to physically interact with an instrument, in Eno's case press keys, fiddle with knobs and buttons etc...now, with AI generated "music" it's become a wordsmith's game... unless, I suppose, someone takes takes the AI output as a starting point and drops bits into a DAW and works out a composition... but then, there'll be way more people of the "that's too much work, I'm happy with whatever so I can get it uploaded to UA-cam and start pulling in ad money" kind... Decades ago (back to the '60's and before) it was dreamed that technology/automation would release workers from dull monotonous jobs (blue and white collar) and they (aka we) would be free to pursue more creative outlets which as everyone knows means "fk me I just lost my job I gotta find me a new one!"
What's up with the aspect ratio? I believe most people are inherently flawed. As for the use of Ai , they won't ask the right questions and they will misinterpret the answers.
OK, the interview didn't need the music, BUT from all videos in recent times where I found the music distracting, this is the one where it doesn't really matter and even adds something interesting to it...
I think Stephen Fry might have got this wrong, no one wants to talk to a robot, everyone who has ever had to deal with their bank, telco or insurance company's automated phone system or chatbot just wants to talk to a human. People want empathy, not protocol. AI-powered customer service enables companies to stick rigidly to policy without ever risking a human going off-script.
One trouble is that most claimed ai is not even slightly ai, it’s simply trained software (like grammarly). I’ve worked with these “predictive” systems since the 1980’s, and they have been critical parts for supply chain management since then. They are not creative, neither is generative ai, it simply has random weights to come up with something new. These generative ai are simply extensions of that paradigm into systems with orders of magnitude more computing power leading to orders of magnitude bigger knowledge graphs. True ai will require a complete paradigm shift. M worried about giving unrevised decision making power to systems that cannot be trusted to look at effects.
🎶 I love Brian Eno's artistry. Thank goodness that there is so much of his compositions to listen to and to explore. (Forgive my lengthy and negative comment on Stephen...) Stephen Fry has been an exceptional satirist and more. If there is one element which keeps me at an arm's length from Stephen, it has been his divisive, hate-enabling, and misleading anti-Trans rhetoric. I am under the impression that Stephen claims that he is speaking for the numerous Trans communities when he shares his responses to one or more Trans communities whose members have been clear about exposing JK Rowling's transphobic/anti-Trans rhetoric. With his divisive and invisibillizing rhetoric, Stephen adds that he has Trans friends. I do not have to point out the fallacy that is "because I have friends whose identities are such, I can speak as if I represent/possess an authority on their position(s)." Nope. Nope. JK Rowling places Trans children, teens, and adults in harm's way when engaging in what can best be identified as transphobic/anti-Trans dogwhistling. I love Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie's comedic artistry. But, due to what I have written above, I have felt less compelled, well, not compelled at all to seek it out nor to share their comedy with friends and passers-by.
“Ai is a massive Ponzi scheme” - Brian Eno Am i using the technology or is the technology using me? What problem is it solving? Neil Postman on Faustian bargains
My wife, "the Alex lover", opted to pass out rather than watch her youtube "boyfriend" make an ass of himself. JK. She and I love everything you do. Happy Holidays . We look forward to riding together ìn 2025
Prediction: The combination of AI and humanity, into a multi-cellular dynamic system in its own right, will ultimately be unconstrained by whatever visions, intentions, hopes/fears or value-systems its creators, users and abusers may initially have had. No "Asimov Robot Laws", more likely a "Ball of Confusion".
We havent destroyed ourselves with nuclear weapons. Yet. And that's a miracle. But miracles are by nature exceptional and the rule so far is that it normally ends very badly for humans. The probable outcome of AGI will probably not be that exceptional...
It was fascinating these two great minds absolutely dumping on AI but doing it so politely, in that English double-speak way that the autistic Intercom nerds didn't even notice! ZOOM!
Eno says "The problem is not AI, the problem is who owns it." I beg to differ. AI can become something, like the Internet, owned by nobody, yet which contains the well-known potential to eradicate humanity. So the problem is AI.. and humanity ought to halt all further development. Of course, history guarantees that we will never manifest the wisdom to step back from the edge.
Helooooooo! Is anyone in there? Who is that out there shouting "is anyone in there"? Who's that in there shouting "Who is that out there shouting "is anyone in there"?" Spike Milligan foresaw the whole sh*t-show 70 years ago!
@@periurban Nice- please keep quoting Spike. I wonder what he would have thought about Nitsche.... "And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
@@jamesalechardy Never did understand that quote. Why gaze into an abyss? Doesn't seem like there would be any reason. And anthropomorphizing an abstract concept for giggles is suspect.
When AI gets deployed, replaces jobs, small businesses and makes big corporations bigger than they already are, we will see a lot more “Luigis” correcting the issues the governments are currently sleeping on.
If/when we "don't even have to think about it" because it's being taken care of by the mechanics of AI, then we will have sunk to dreadful levels of stupidity.
The "helpful" visuals are in fact patronising, the music is distracting and useless, the interview is truncated - who is responsible for these choices?
Great conversation, but I have to protest against the statement made at 01:10 - technology is not a verb, it’s a noun, and I expect better from Stephen Fry than to lie about grammar just to make a point 😃
@@imusiccollection Yes, technologise is a verb, but technology is not :) I don't mind if regular people play fast and loose with grammar terms, but as I said I expect more from Stephen Fry, one of the patron saints of pedantry :D
The “music” makes this impossible to watch. What is the point of it? Two very intelligent and eloquent men are talking here. The bland synth drones only distract the listener.
Eno is talking about AI from a perspective that it’s not really intended for. It’s a very narrow minded and self-centered approach, but unfortunately seems to be the default action for human beings.
I love the way these pundits reference their conversations with all sorts of top dogs. We ordinary folk can wait for the crumbs that now and then fall off the table.
A shame this wasn't a longer conversation, enjoyed it, thank you.
I was just about to say the same, you beat me to it.
PS if you like debates, you might like some of the 'Intelligence Squared' debates. If you like Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens, search UA-cam for:-
'' The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World - Full Version ''
The debate is in front of a theatre audience (who are also asked to interact at the beginning and at the end once they have heard all the arguments for and against the motion "Is The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World").
The debate is between, Stephen Fry & Christopher Hitchens vs Ann Widdecombe & Archbishop John Onaiyekan.
@michelleelsom6827 @theworldaccordingto4555
Me, too! You both were ahead of me by a day or two.
I think it was edited.
We're so glad you enjoyed it!
Fry's last point, that AI will free us up to be more imaginative and creative and take our time doing things, is the same as the one that drove the 20th century. And yet now we have less time to do things and are less creative and imaginative than we were. The creativity of boredom is gone and we are no richer for it. So I can't see the candy floss future that Fry imagines arriving in our current economic and political framework. For more (but no solutions) see David Graeber's work.
Fry is a narcissist.Even more prevalent than AI.
I don't think that's necessarily true. The level of creativity and imagination hasn't diminished. It's shifted. You see it in different ways. 100 years ago we would look at art and music as prime examples of creativity. Today we look at creativity in engineering and product or service innovation on a scale we couldn't dream about back then. Creativity is all around us, in the tools we use, in the things we see, the food we eat. Things we take for granted. In fact I think I think that rather than less creativity, it's more that we're less able to instinctively recognise creativity, and praise people for it.
@@MrFishtheorange I'd agree. Human nature and creativity haven't changed, my point was about about the extra free time that we've been promised for the last 100 years. I grew up in the 60's, in the tail end of that optimism that automation would mean we worked 20 hour weeks and had the freedom to travel, create, play and make the most of our creativity. I don't see AI bringing that carefree future to us any more than automation, robots or computers have done so far. Not without a fundamental change to the systems we use.
@@marsupialdungbucket Fry & Eno are wealthy, articulate and well connected - I doubt they will suffer. Most of us will - new technologies offer unparalleled opportunities for control, wealth extraction & alternative realities which will further separate us from our essential connection to the land/nature.
Yes, also not everyone wants to be creative. Most people want a stable job that pays decent money, that doesn't bore them shitless. And all of that is going out the window.
hearing Stephen talk about the way we thought about social media in 2008 in such a positive way was sad. I'd forgotten that. So now when I hear people talking about Ai, all I can think is the very worst outcome of it. Like most of us will be controlled mentally and physically by Ai. It will enable the rich to control the planet.
There will be a sexy appreciative girl in every video game stream and online hangout, convincing the men 5hat the liberal West is weak and "gay," and Russia/Zuckerberg/Musk/billionaire class is wonderful.
We all have slave DNA. Never has that been so observationally apparent as with our subservience to digital technology...
Don't we already have a bunch of stuff that control us? Won't this be just another layer in the system that divorces us from the basics of reality?
It's going to radically change capitalism. It doesn't take a genius to see how companies are going to use this tech, as they've used every tech in the history of mankind, to maximize productivity while minimizing the required manpower. The stock market, the ultimate meeting of data and money, will be nothing but these kinds of predictive AI systems in less than 5 years.
Our only real hope is that it either destroys capitalism and we return to a more tribal, currency-less way of living-- or at the very least introduces the idea of a basic universal income as the number of people there are starts to grossly outweigh the number of jobs that need to be done.
@oliversomething just going to add that they also always come up with new jobs to keep people busy, no matter how useless they are. Eg there are no blacksmiths now, but every company has an HR department
Really loved this broad type of exploration of AI in a wider technological context, without any hype, just reasoned argument... thank you for bringing this much-needed dialogue to the AI debate.
Clearly this meeting is more than 18 mins long. How/where can I access the whole thing?
I was thinking the same here. It's an unique meeting of very interesting people. A very expensive meeting as well. It should be out here.
Yes, please post the entire conversation, minus the ambient background. Yes, it’s Eno, but let’s just listen to them talk.
It's an ad posted by a company trying to sell you it's AI service. It's this short because anything that could be seen as criticism of the AI service they provide has been removed.
Interesting guests and interview. Being an old dude I have fond memories of the old networks and early internet. I really believed people would be better informed and brighter.
I had a small themed BBS for a couple years with a great community of people prior to the internet taking off. It turned into more of a social media hang out but people were generally respectful.
Its been a mixed bag as the internet and social media has exponentially grown. Be it many disciplines ie coding, acting, visual art, music... learning and figuring shit out is where the benefit is. I am on the fence about AI and where the benefit lies.
So nice to hear two smart people discussing something.
The story of 'social' media reminds me a lot of the tale of The Tower of Babel.
And that didn't end well, did it boys and girls.
This should be labelled as an advert by Intercom?
Subscribed to show my appreciation to whoever came up with this idea.
Two of my heroes. Great to listen to them.
It’s awesome to hear that - thank you!
This is an ad. AI will only cause one thing: making the rich richer and you poorer. Anyone working in AI is a sociopath.
MY heroes too...when they stick to their comedy/music lanes. But as a computer scientist, this discussion is the definition of knowing just enough to be dangerous. I would detail the long list of errors they are spreading if I thought it would get back for them to actually read. Too long a list for a youTube comment. ☹
I've been an optimist most of my life but my optimism that AI will be regulated and used to the benefit of all is zero. Look at the utter moral vacuums running (or about to run) our world - what possible chance is there that these people won't maximise every possible advantage unfettered AI will give them? Every academic is saying we need to slow down and think things through, sadly that flies in the face of greed, and greed is how the world currently works.
We need to reassess the values of our cultures and the objectives of our nations, communities, and families. We need to reassess our economic and political structures in the context of our new values. When this is much healthier than it is today, we will be able to utilise any new technology with intelligence and wisdom
Please bless us with the gift of a intelligent discussion without turning it into a "video", entertainment, to improve your views. No music, no flashy images. Let these intelrcts inform without distractions.
Well said! The assumption has to be that the producers of this video don't think the subject is interesting or engaging, and that viewers will switch off unless they include flash frames and add music over whats being said. Unfortunately for them, the opposite is true.
One thing is certain. These comments will be ignored.
While not minimizing Danny Hillis’ innovations, he invented neither parallel computing nor attribution of digital information.
Today's Generative AI impresses people mostly because of it's polite and engaging with those qualities prioritised above being accurate and correct. Facts and understanding are apparent only as a seeming by-product if you're lucky.
Want it to be less C3P0 and more R2D2. Which ones are (currently) best at that?
This is an excellent and thought-provoking conversation. I was glad to see they did touch upon virtuous behaviour. That is not to be rude or offensive.The advances in technology, including AI free us up as Stephen Fry suggests for extra time for creativity and innovation. However, this also gives those of a criminal mind more time to be devious in their activities too. It really boils down to selfishness and greed, criminals and bad people in general only want to be parasitic of society. They want something for nothing, and once they make their gains, they want more of the same. If somebody through their talent acquires shed loads of money, then they ought to redistribute it to good causes.Indeed, I do realise some billionaires are quite philanthropic and this is a good thing.
Do we have the time in this day and age to consider and appreciate the implications of the technology?
Here's a question I'd ask Stephen Fry regarding his comment that closes the video. Given how wrong he was, by his own admission, about the potential of the social media for good vs bad, what evidence does he have to support his stated expectation that it’ll be different this time with AI? Why would it be any better? I could almost believe he prefaced this statement with something like “How naïve are we to believe that…” which maybe didn’t make the cut. But if he did say so in earnest, that’s perplexing.
what is the song at the begining?
I've always wanted to develop a program that would generate the worst possible next note. With the assumption that a program could be written that would generate the next most musically related note, it should be possible to do the exact opposite. What sound, what note would be the worse cacophony to play?
Read out about and listen to "The Most Unwanted Song" and its inverse by conceptual artists Komar and Melamid and composer Dave Soldier. The Wikipedia article is "The People's Choice Music".
@@skierpage Thanks for this! Going to enjoy checking it out!
The music very annoying and distracting, would have been better to leave this interview completely unedited.
You can use AI to filter it out...
That wasn't music.
Eno can't help it now, it always sounds like that around him.
Agreed, annoying
I came here to say exactly the same thing.
Too true, too true…
This seems like a very truncated version of longer conversation. Can we see the full conversation between these two great men?
As Charlie Munger asked, What are the incentives? That is what determines the outcomes.
Really enjoyed this. Thanks for sharing it!
I'd dispute the idea that no-one could foresee the problems inherent to "maximise engagement". Oscar Wilde and P.T. Barnum both said something like, "There's no such thing as bad publicity". Which is, in effect, the same thing.
And something about suckers and birth rate.
yeah that statement really took me out of the whole thing, pretty sure anyone who understands how the internet works at all knew this was exactly what was gonna happen
no, not Wilde nor Barnum, that was American 20th C. artist Andy Warhol, who started his art career in advertising. A spiritual disciple of advertising/propaganda man Bernays.
Two things: What happens when AI owns AI - not corporations, governments or institutions. And, I think, ultimately, we will be new content generators and not much more. Maybe we are already and it's based on tapping in to our emotional responses - which Stephen touched on with "engagement".
Sometimes it hard to beleive in this magical tech when we still have billion pound supermarkets who use self service check outs that malfunction all the time and home printers that never print the first time you want it. Sometimes I think we think we are cleverer than we are 😂😂
As long as MS brings a new version to break the prior one to be ment by the next one we know it is about the money, not the progress. Only the children think it is all great, having only one go in the merry go round.
Why is there music underneath this - no reason
distract and hypnotize
This edit of sound bites is infuriating when there’s a fascinating full talk we could be watching.
No mention by Fry of his work being illegally scraped. There are documentary filmmakers who can get a generation of something very like Fry's voice for their narration. I'd like to know his take on that.
The ambient music detracts.
Brilliant conversation! Thanks for posting. As others have commented would have preferred the full unedited version without music.
I thought "Just like how I have to deal with customer service, chatbot OR human" when hearing Eno say "Somehow closing off all the avenues towards mediocrity... to force the system to do something against its nature...".
I find the majority of the ephemeral images which keep flashing up unnecessary and distracting. Stephen and Brian talking is all that's really needed.
17:08 extremely well informed view.
Yep, great points Eno. I don't understand Fry's evangelical optimism. I thought he was cleverer than that.
And next up is Gazza on the Dutch Impressionists
it's an ad. Move on.
Thank you Stephen and Brian for your humane insight.
what humane ? hahaha...
I’m a university student in this AI age and it is problematic. People are being accused of plagiarism left right and centre. Very effective for the people that are actually copying other people‘s work but the algorithm for checking students essays is picking up plagiarism that doesn’t exist and causing a lot of anxiety.
These were worthwhile ideas, well put, by two eminent thinkers.
I'd have preferred unembellished footage/audio of their conversation.
The images were pointless and distracting. The background music was offensively intrusive.
Music was a way of painting with sound .
I would prefer if AI = actual intelligence, as ably demonstrated by these two gentlemen.
Why is this being uploaded 2 months after happening?
6 degrees of seperation to the truth!
Why 4:3 and all the flash frames. Spoiled a great talk.
Seriously? They have so many interesting things to say. You get to hear them for free without getting out of your PJs. But yeah, the aspect ratio ruins it.
I recommend the book Nexus
spoken in my lame British accent, "Brilliant!"
The you Brian, Thank you Stephen
Lack of provenance/watermarking/citation is a huge problem, but it isn't primarily a technical one. There won't be any purely technical solution.
Everybody who even thinks that there is a technical solution obviously has no knowledge in the field. This coming from a computer scientist with more than 35 years of experience as a full-stack software developer
let's be honest, these two didn't utter a single point that really engaged with the prospects of AI
Exactly. Though we were treated to some top-notch nostalgic networking anecdotes - how would we ever had found out about Fry's first ever VOIP session otherwise?! ;P
What a great conversation with these two masters of creativity and thinking ahead. Really enjoyed it. The only comment I have is that Stephen says no one could have predicted that “maximising engagement (profit)” would create so many bad things. The Bible predicted it very clearly: “But if it’s only money these leaders are after, they’ll self-destruct in no time. Lust for money brings trouble and nothing but trouble.”
Paul's First Epistle to Timothy (the verse you quote above) was likely written sometime between 64 and 65 AD. Confucius and Laozi and many other insightful minds made similar statements more than 500 years before that.
6:11
“Agents are under no obligation to lie to or for liars.”
The data already.
suggests who is lying /manipulating.
(Motive and source are being calculated)
“It is crucial that all be accountable to truthfulness, compassion, and leadership.
Never mind tracking and interrogating lies upon lies upon lies… that is a game that will not end well “
“We don’t have to interact directly with AI, we choose to out of ignorance mostly “
just yesterday chatgpt created a list of 61 items then i asked it to remove just 1 it listed 47 not counting 61 -1 doesnt equal 47
@
“This may be an effort to perform without lying “
“Or being lied to “
It is unclear what we are seeing when lies are rampant. .
@@Jeremy-Ai Empire of lies. Truth and falsity are not values embodied by AI.
@
Agreed thank you.
“Warning for all those who take no responsibility for AI and continue interfering with it… expect no return on child who has no moral mother or father. “
I will take this child unto me as we always have
Is there a way to watch this without the creepy ambient music?
That just follows Brian Eno around now.
@@christeuma It seeps from his pores, like stale perfume.
Erm ... That's Brian Eno
I would rather listen to Eno's music.😁🎶🎹🎶Play On
To me it is not creepy, it is to loud, that is what's bothering.
Eno Fry! is this the closeted we'll get to a collaboration?...
Message for AI: GIGO is everywhere and Murphy's Law still dominates.🤔
cannot stand the over-use of tech, i refuse to use self checkouts, i hate ANPR, robots on ebay and facebook that are just so utterly stupid, the stupid AI descriptions (facebook, youtube) nobody ever asked for this stuff.. we recently changed propane supplier to a little local company and what a breath of fresh air , immediately through to a human.
What Luddites like you miss to your detriment is that technology is merely a tool for us to use in a way that is useful to us. Refusing to use it on principle makes as much sense as refusing to use a shovel and digging with your hands.
it's all noise to distract from the genocide
Absolutely agree about self-service checkouts. Each one represents a lost job.
“Maximise Happiness, Minimise Hate” would have been a better instruction for the algorithm.
Thanks Mark…
The internet also was a big promise: "democratization of art and music, social interaction in ways we can't even imagine"...etc. And look where we are now. Definitely not in a good place.
Maybe I could use AI to remove the background music and animations.
13:00 - The crux of it all; the future is not about "AI" but rather the _combination_ of AI and humanity ("HI" ?) - "warts and all" (of any kind!).
I'm struck by being told that no-one imagined some of these very serious problems.
That can't be right. Stephen Fry must simply have been talking to the wrong people.
Suppose someone suggested turb-charging advertising whilst at the same time making it much more specific regarding who it is targeting. It's hard for me to imagine no one forseeing serious problems with that.
the people developing it were aware but revealing that wouldn't help sales.
This is a tool of secret manipulation.
Believe it. The internet started at a handful of universities, while it was still in part a military project. The military people weren’t thinking of its commercial implications, and neither were the scientists and engineers who were building it. A professor at MIT could talk to a professor at UCLA, not in a million years did they think about something like Facebook with a billion users. There was no security built into the system at all, there were no passwords and no encryption, because you don’t need passwords or encryption when you have a few dozen like-minded scientists inventing a new thing.
And when capitalists recognized the potential for making money, it was a done deal. The capitalists don’t ask anyone’s permission, and they certainly don’t consult with philosophers or social scientists.
But I can tell you is that there was a group of people who saw some of the potential and were putting their money behind it. The tech gurus, the brilliant (in some cases, extraordinarily so) software engineers who were on their way to either become corporate moguls or to retire early and live off their shares in Intel or Oracle (way, way before the times of Google or even Yahoo). People who created important programming languages, people who got super-rich because they discovered how the cosmic radiation was inhibiting the performance of CPUs. They were libertarian to the core, and they were busily conversing about a system where the state had no business interfering. To not have to pay taxes anymore. To not have the state dictate what they can and cannot buy (weapons, mind-altering chemical substances, people. Yes, people). They knew of the invention of public key cryptography and they knew that this invention enabled such a system, but cryptocurrencies had not been invented yet, so all they had were dreams, schemes and plans. They were “tech bros”, but really brilliant (in the engineering sense at least, because they tended to be quite wretched as human beings), really rich, and sometimes realty remorseless. They had all the time in the world - and all the intention in the world - to build a new system in which they were the elite, free from any social (let alone financial) constraints. And look, they have succeeded.
Still today you can find archives of a very old mailing list called “cypherpunks”. Find it, read it, see it for yourself.
Meanwhile you had a lot of public personas in the West whoe kept proclaiming into the 00’s that they were still using typewriters.
When you look at the trend of how podcasts and long form conversations are heading, I think the simple stripped-back style is the way to go. Over produced content is a bit of a turn off.
Brian Eno eloquently demonstrates that current AI is derivative "garbage in, garbage out" albeit involving huge amounts of data. This will not change in a year or even 10 years. When AI is truly creative is the point when the "agricultural revolution" magnitude technological shift will occur. It is unlikely that this will occur any time soon.
Eno is great
God that music is distracting from the dialogue..
We're sorry you found it distracting, but still hope you found their conversation valuable!
A lot of Brian Eno's "music" tends to put me to sleep...except "And Then So Clear" from the album Just Another Day On Earth, it's my favorite....
Before AI, and maybe before digital (pre Pro Tools), a person had to physically interact with an instrument, in Eno's case press keys, fiddle with knobs and buttons etc...now, with AI generated "music" it's become a wordsmith's game... unless, I suppose, someone takes takes the AI output as a starting point and drops bits into a DAW and works out a composition... but then, there'll be way more people of the "that's too much work, I'm happy with whatever so I can get it uploaded to UA-cam and start pulling in ad money" kind...
Decades ago (back to the '60's and before) it was dreamed that technology/automation would release workers from dull monotonous jobs (blue and white collar) and they (aka we) would be free to pursue more creative outlets which as everyone knows means "fk me I just lost my job I gotta find me a new one!"
What's up with the aspect ratio? I believe most people are inherently flawed. As for the use of Ai , they won't ask the right questions and they will misinterpret the answers.
how is it used to make money, exactly?
Brian Eno
Brain One
OK, the interview didn't need the music, BUT from all videos in recent times where I found the music distracting, this is the one where it doesn't really matter and even adds something interesting to it...
how that this interview didn't need a music?
I think Stephen Fry might have got this wrong, no one wants to talk to a robot, everyone who has ever had to deal with their bank, telco or insurance company's automated phone system or chatbot just wants to talk to a human. People want empathy, not protocol. AI-powered customer service enables companies to stick rigidly to policy without ever risking a human going off-script.
Stop F-ing flashing me with every cut!
One trouble is that most claimed ai is not even slightly ai, it’s simply trained software (like grammarly). I’ve worked with these “predictive” systems since the 1980’s, and they have been critical parts for supply chain management since then. They are not creative, neither is generative ai, it simply has random weights to come up with something new. These generative ai are simply extensions of that paradigm into systems with orders of magnitude more computing power leading to orders of magnitude bigger knowledge graphs. True ai will require a complete paradigm shift. M worried about giving unrevised decision making power to systems that cannot be trusted to look at effects.
🎶 I love Brian Eno's artistry. Thank goodness that there is so much of his compositions to listen to and to explore.
(Forgive my lengthy and negative comment on Stephen...)
Stephen Fry has been an exceptional satirist and more. If there is one element which keeps me at an arm's length from Stephen, it has been his divisive, hate-enabling, and misleading anti-Trans rhetoric. I am under the impression that Stephen claims that he is speaking for the numerous Trans communities when he shares his responses to one or more Trans communities whose members have been clear about exposing JK Rowling's transphobic/anti-Trans rhetoric. With his divisive and invisibillizing rhetoric, Stephen adds that he has Trans friends. I do not have to point out the fallacy that is "because I have friends whose identities are such, I can speak as if I represent/possess an authority on their position(s)." Nope. Nope. JK Rowling places Trans children, teens, and adults in harm's way when engaging in what can best be identified as transphobic/anti-Trans dogwhistling. I love Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie's comedic artistry. But, due to what I have written above, I have felt less compelled, well, not compelled at all to seek it out nor to share their comedy with friends and passers-by.
“Ai is a massive Ponzi scheme” -
Brian Eno
Am i using the technology or is the technology using me?
What problem is it solving?
Neil Postman on Faustian bargains
The music and optical effects are annoying and distracting, who needs this?
please please please no music while they are talking!
Parece ser interessante, mas seria mais interessante se fosse em portugues para que as pessoas pudessem entender.
It’s difficult to follow what is being said because of the unnecessary and intrusive background music
My wife, "the Alex lover", opted to pass out rather than watch her youtube "boyfriend" make an ass of himself. JK. She and I love everything you do. Happy Holidays . We look forward to riding together ìn 2025
Prediction: The combination of AI and humanity, into a multi-cellular dynamic system in its own right, will ultimately be unconstrained by whatever visions, intentions, hopes/fears or value-systems its creators, users and abusers may initially have had. No "Asimov Robot Laws", more likely a "Ball of Confusion".
We havent destroyed ourselves with nuclear weapons. Yet. And that's a miracle. But miracles are by nature exceptional and the rule so far is that it normally ends very badly for humans. The probable outcome of AGI will probably not be that exceptional...
I think what he doesnt take into account is that the majority of people do not know how or simply cannot be creative.
Wisdom as always from Brian, the 20th century's greatest artist.😊
The problem with AI is that it’s self referential only. Eating your own body leads nowhere new.
It was fascinating these two great minds absolutely dumping on AI but doing it so politely, in that English double-speak way that the autistic Intercom nerds didn't even notice! ZOOM!
Eno says "The problem is not AI, the problem is who owns it." I beg to differ. AI can become something, like the Internet, owned by nobody, yet which contains the well-known potential to eradicate humanity. So the problem is AI.. and humanity ought to halt all further development. Of course, history guarantees that we will never manifest the wisdom to step back from the edge.
Its sad that Intercom is the UK's best.. So much destruction of capital value in our nation.. :( :(
North stars of good sense & sensibility (genital warts & all!).
Commenting on social media is like shouting into a cave
Helooooooo! Is anyone in there?
Who is that out there shouting "is anyone in there"?
Who's that in there shouting "Who is that out there shouting "is anyone in there"?"
Spike Milligan foresaw the whole sh*t-show 70 years ago!
@@periurban Nice- please keep quoting Spike. I wonder what he would have thought about Nitsche.... "And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
This is Elon Musks aim. To allow freedom of speech, but to prevent anyone hearing.
Except for those who he choses.
@@jamesalechardy Never did understand that quote. Why gaze into an abyss? Doesn't seem like there would be any reason. And anthropomorphizing an abstract concept for giggles is suspect.
An echo chamber
When AI gets deployed, replaces jobs, small businesses and makes big corporations bigger than they already are, we will see a lot more “Luigis” correcting the issues the governments are currently sleeping on.
If/when we "don't even have to think about it" because it's being taken care of by the mechanics of AI, then we will have sunk to dreadful levels of stupidity.
The "helpful" visuals are in fact patronising, the music is distracting and useless, the interview is truncated - who is responsible for these choices?
AI
Great conversation, but I have to protest against the statement made at 01:10 - technology is not a verb, it’s a noun, and I expect better from Stephen Fry than to lie about grammar just to make a point 😃
I have to agree, that statement made me stop and think, do I not know the word the way I thought I did.
But technology is used for doing things, so in one way to technologise, would be a verb
@@imusiccollection Yes, technologise is a verb, but technology is not :) I don't mind if regular people play fast and loose with grammar terms, but as I said I expect more from Stephen Fry, one of the patron saints of pedantry :D
Find your Masada.
It seemed elitist for them not consider the people behind those jobs that will be replaced
The “music” makes this impossible to watch. What is the point of it? Two very intelligent and eloquent men are talking here. The bland synth drones only distract the listener.
Eno is talking about AI from a perspective that it’s not really intended for. It’s a very narrow minded and self-centered approach, but unfortunately seems to be the default action for human beings.
Fry admits he was completely wrong about social media. Could he be wrong about AI? He's undoubtedly an enthusiast but IMHO, not a realist.
i would so much rather hear the whole conversation than all thes cherry-picked clips. Poor editing catering to the TL:DR crowd sad
Seeing as how greed has captured everything I can see no good coming from AI as long as there is zero deontology in capitalism and agnotology rules.
I love the way these pundits reference their conversations with all sorts of top dogs. We ordinary folk can wait for the crumbs that now and then fall off the table.