Presumably people who bought NFTs. If you’re going to trick yourself into thinking your dumb, AI-generated piece of shitty “art” was a worthwhile investment, you might as well enjoy the perks of being in such an exclusive, stupid club.
They weren’t even AI generated. Is there a AI generated at least they’d be unique from each other, there were a series of randomly lead images. It wasn’t AI that made them, it was basically just a bunch of if statements.
AI generated NFTs would also be pointless because anyone could get them or something very similar by giving the same prompt to an AI but at least they’d have some merit, at least they would be interesting.
How are they not intelligent? You are able to put in arbitrary prompts and its able to return an image constructed to your specifications. Seems you are being pedantic
In my language the ability to abstract is part of the definition of intelligence and that’s something no current “AI” can do. To be considered intelligent the program would have to be able to derive solutions for previously unknown problems from it’s current knowledge only.
There’s a distinction between intelligence and sentience.
The stuff impressing people right now only has a tiny short term memory and no way of really transferring that short term memory to long term memory, so it’s definitely not something you can characterise as sentience.
It is definitely intelligence, though, since it can draw from a very large pretrained set of knowledge with deep relational connections.
The enjoyment of going to parties typically relies on the attendees of the party and how much you like or dislike them. This specific party is full of people who bought monkey JPEGs and turned them into their entire personality. So, presumably, I would not like this party.
It’s not for anyone with a shred of sense. Lighting aside, anyone still being conned by the NFT image market is unfortunately probably willfully ignorant, impossibly stubborn, and unable to learn from their mistakes or the mistakes of others. There are plenty of working ways to tokenize images for an actual purpose, blockchain verification is worthless for individual images and literally always was.
maybe they’re just having fun. People purchase status items all the time and no one has a problem with it. There is nothing fundamentally different between showing off your 100k monkey picture with showing off your 100k watch.
Take less than five minutes out of your day to compare the impact of a rolex watch with the impact of a blockchain interaction. It sounds like you don’t understand how wildly different those two things are, either physically (one does not exist, the other does) or in an environmental context (one uses grid power with every verification, one is mechanical). “Buying status symbols for fun” would make a good album title for a boy band a decade ago.
I hate to say this but cricket is right. The item being physical or not do not matter for this kind of show off purshase. A Rolex or Birkin has pratically no construction cost, same as an nft (relative to their selling price).
And I don’t understand the point about the environnement, are you saying nft are negative because of their environnemental impact while a Rolex is positive ?
If so you I’m sure you can find plenty of status symbol item that pollute more than nft…
Nft are still stupid and people at this party are probably insufferable tho.
Uninformed take. The lowball for construction cost on a 2,000 euro rolex is ~700 euro. You also don’t understand the power draw of blockchain verification. You are 100% talking out of your ass.
Something physically existing or not is not what makes a status symbol. Are you implying something about energy consumption of blockchains? The network these are on (ethereum) no longer uses PoW mining, so the energy argument does not work here.
Presumably people who bought NFTs. If you’re going to trick yourself into thinking your dumb, AI-generated piece of shitty “art” was a worthwhile investment, you might as well enjoy the perks of being in such an exclusive, stupid club.
They weren’t even AI generated. Is there a AI generated at least they’d be unique from each other, there were a series of randomly lead images. It wasn’t AI that made them, it was basically just a bunch of if statements.
AI generated NFTs would also be pointless because anyone could get them or something very similar by giving the same prompt to an AI but at least they’d have some merit, at least they would be interesting.
ah, totally different from LLMs then…
The marketing team called it AI, that means its different !!!
I mean, at a certain point, everything in computers comes down to getting stuff from memory and running a bunch of if statements on it.
Yeah procedurally generated would be the correct description.
But the end result is kinda the same, it’s a lot of similar images generated with little effort.
The “AI” image generators aren’t real AI, they’re just called that…
the “I” in “AI” is not real intelligence either
Well theoretically AI may exist. We just don’t have it yet. Current image generators and LLM are called that but they ain’t it…
How are they not intelligent? You are able to put in arbitrary prompts and its able to return an image constructed to your specifications. Seems you are being pedantic
In my language the ability to abstract is part of the definition of intelligence and that’s something no current “AI” can do. To be considered intelligent the program would have to be able to derive solutions for previously unknown problems from it’s current knowledge only.
There’s a distinction between intelligence and sentience.
The stuff impressing people right now only has a tiny short term memory and no way of really transferring that short term memory to long term memory, so it’s definitely not something you can characterise as sentience.
It is definitely intelligence, though, since it can draw from a very large pretrained set of knowledge with deep relational connections.
deleted by creator
an AI*
it’s just a party lol who doesn’t like parties
The enjoyment of going to parties typically relies on the attendees of the party and how much you like or dislike them. This specific party is full of people who bought monkey JPEGs and turned them into their entire personality. So, presumably, I would not like this party.
It’s not for you, that’s ok.
It’s not for anyone with a shred of sense. Lighting aside, anyone still being conned by the NFT image market is unfortunately probably willfully ignorant, impossibly stubborn, and unable to learn from their mistakes or the mistakes of others. There are plenty of working ways to tokenize images for an actual purpose, blockchain verification is worthless for individual images and literally always was.
The year is 2043, and Chumlee has been uploaded to the Metaverse.
“I remember those,” Chumlee said, his voice echoing through the virtual space. “Let me run this by my valuation expert, the all-knowing singularity.”
A moment later, Chumlee’s eyes widened in surprise. “Fourteen trillion?” he repeated.
“That’s what it says,” the singularity replied.
Chumlee shook his head. “I can’t believe it. I’ll give you two.”
maybe they’re just having fun. People purchase status items all the time and no one has a problem with it. There is nothing fundamentally different between showing off your 100k monkey picture with showing off your 100k watch.
Take less than five minutes out of your day to compare the impact of a rolex watch with the impact of a blockchain interaction. It sounds like you don’t understand how wildly different those two things are, either physically (one does not exist, the other does) or in an environmental context (one uses grid power with every verification, one is mechanical). “Buying status symbols for fun” would make a good album title for a boy band a decade ago.
I hate to say this but cricket is right. The item being physical or not do not matter for this kind of show off purshase. A Rolex or Birkin has pratically no construction cost, same as an nft (relative to their selling price).
And I don’t understand the point about the environnement, are you saying nft are negative because of their environnemental impact while a Rolex is positive ? If so you I’m sure you can find plenty of status symbol item that pollute more than nft…
Nft are still stupid and people at this party are probably insufferable tho.
Uninformed take. The lowball for construction cost on a 2,000 euro rolex is ~700 euro. You also don’t understand the power draw of blockchain verification. You are 100% talking out of your ass.
Something physically existing or not is not what makes a status symbol. Are you implying something about energy consumption of blockchains? The network these are on (ethereum) no longer uses PoW mining, so the energy argument does not work here.
It quite literally is lmao