Speaker 1: I'll get a team. It's Harps, It's it's Jumbo, It's
Speaker 1: Tiffany and Cook, It's David, Bryan, Kevin, Patrick, Gillespie, it's
Speaker 1: the project that's us. We should call it the US projective.
Speaker 2: Do you always say the same seventy eight middle names
Speaker 2: for Gillespow or they did?
Speaker 3: I think they're mostly the same, you know, even always
Speaker 3: makes it Patrick, always a Patrick.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, Well, I don't know. I don't know
Speaker 1: what it actually is, but I feel like Tiffany and Cook, Craig, Anthony, Harpa.
Speaker 1: We have you actually told me? You probably told me
Speaker 1: once before you have one?
Speaker 3: Oh? No, I do you do have a middle name.
Speaker 3: It's very embarrassing.
Speaker 1: It's Andrew, I say Andrew. It starts with a vowel.
Speaker 3: Was that embarrassing because of the word it spells.
Speaker 1: Dang Wow, that's a nice acronym and can I it's
Speaker 1: what appropriate? I mean, you are a bit of a dag.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's true, that's true.
Speaker 1: That's okay. My mum uses that term, and usually dag.
Speaker 1: It's quite a it's quite a warm term. It's like
Speaker 1: someone's a bit funny or a bit.
Speaker 3: It wasn't so warm when I was growing up though,
Speaker 3: you know, but so I didn't make a big thing
Speaker 3: of it.
Speaker 1: At least you didn't get called jumbo for hey. I
Speaker 1: was speaking of school, speaking of those tender years that
Speaker 1: molded and shaped and informed the fucking amazing grown ups
Speaker 1: that the three of us have become. So they've been
Speaker 1: talking about putting a limit on kids accessing social media,
Speaker 1: which I think you wrote somewhere is like pretty much
Speaker 1: you didn't say this, but this is kind of what
Speaker 1: you said. This is how I interpret it. You're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: a great idea. How do you enforce that? So the
Speaker 1: idea they've been talking about it on the news down
Speaker 1: here a little bit recently. I don't know about it, QLD,
Speaker 1: but the idea of limiting teenagers or stopping teenagers from
Speaker 1: accessing certain programs or apps or whatever until they're sixteen.
Speaker 1: What are your thoughts on that? Is it possible? Is
Speaker 1: it a ridict? Like? It sounds like a good idea maybe,
Speaker 1: but impossible to as you said, enforce.
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, they're doing such a good job of
Speaker 3: stopping teenagers accessing porn that I'm sure it'll be really
Speaker 3: really easy for them to get them to stop accessing
Speaker 3: social media. You know, the reality is this difficult, if
Speaker 3: not impossible, to do any kind of enforcement. And I
Speaker 3: know it sounds good to a politician to stand up
Speaker 3: and bang on about doing it and people say, oh, yes,
Speaker 3: that's a good idea. I think it's more informative that
Speaker 3: they feel the need to do it than whether or
Speaker 3: not it's actually doable. The fact that we are now
Speaker 3: having a public conversation about social media like we are
Speaker 3: talking of cigarettes, to me is a positive step forward
Speaker 3: because there's not a lot of difference between the two
Speaker 3: in the senses that matter, meaning the problem with social
Speaker 3: media and not just social media by the way. I mean.
Speaker 3: That's a problem I have with this chat about social
Speaker 3: media is it seems like that's the only thing we've
Speaker 3: got to worry about, and don't worry too much about
Speaker 3: the online gambling, the pawn the online gaming, all those things.
Speaker 3: Let's not make a fuss about that. Let's criticize Facebook
Speaker 3: and Instagram. But it's a start. It's at least recognizing
Speaker 3: that there's something that we have to be concerned about,
Speaker 3: and if nothing else, people might ask themselves, why do
Speaker 3: they want to ban something like that? And then they
Speaker 3: might ask the next question and find out, well, because
Speaker 3: this stuff is designed to addict your children, and once
Speaker 3: they are addicted to that, then they are much more
Speaker 3: easily addicted to everything else. And we can already see
Speaker 3: that transition happening in schools where kids get hooked, get
Speaker 3: the dopamine circuitry fired up by software in the form
Speaker 3: of social media or gaming or gambling, and then easily
Speaker 3: transitioned to a substance addiction through vaping, which is then
Speaker 3: easily transferred to an even harder substance addiction, ultimately to
Speaker 3: something like cocaine.
Speaker 1: I don't understand technology the way that you do. And
Speaker 1: you're I think designed apps, and you're a programmer and
Speaker 1: you can write code and you can do those things
Speaker 1: that to me are just concepts, right. But lately I've
Speaker 1: been hearing some of the shows that I listened to
Speaker 1: where they've had what seemed to be like people who
Speaker 1: are at the cold face of AI, some of them
Speaker 1: who have jumped out of AI with great concern, like literally.
Speaker 4: Saying that that artificial intelligence could pretty much bring about
Speaker 4: the destruction of mankind if it evolves to a certain
Speaker 4: point where it is so intelligent, like he was telling
Speaker 4: the guy that I was listening to was telling a
Speaker 4: story about how this machine was trying to or AI
Speaker 4: was trying to get through this into this program or
Speaker 4: into this I don't know whatever it was, but you
Speaker 4: know how they give you like a blurred image with
Speaker 4: letters and you need to need to go, oh that's
Speaker 4: a G and a six and a one for S,
Speaker 4: but it's not written clearly, but you can read it
Speaker 4: and then type in that code and that opens that up.
Speaker 4: So this, this computer or this AI was communicating with
Speaker 4: a person.
Speaker 1: The person didn't know what's it called the Turing testy
Speaker 1: tries to identify whether or not if a computer can
Speaker 1: trick a human, but it was. It was communicating with
Speaker 1: this person and said, can you I can't read this clearly?
Speaker 1: Could you you know? Help? And the human said as
Speaker 1: long as you're not as long as you're not a bot,
Speaker 1: L O L. And the AI said, oh, no, definitely
Speaker 1: not lol. I have I'm vision impaired, right, So it
Speaker 1: hadn't been trained to do this. It figured this out
Speaker 1: and it told this real person that it was vision impaired.
Speaker 1: Then the person apologized and gave them the code, and
Speaker 1: it did that all by itself and I'm like, is
Speaker 1: this and they reckon its potential now is absolutely nothing
Speaker 1: compared to what it will be in as little as
Speaker 1: one or two years.
Speaker 3: Do we need to worry, Yes, and yes we do
Speaker 3: need to worry. No, it won't matter because as soon
Speaker 3: as it hits on what's called artificial general intelligence, which
Speaker 3: is essentially human intelligence or more, the rate of growth
Speaker 3: in itself will be so exponential that it will all
Speaker 3: be over before we even realize it started. So whatever
Speaker 3: they will do to us or will be over before
Speaker 3: we even know it started. So it's a disturbing projection.
Speaker 3: And the really disturbing part about it is that not
Speaker 3: only is no one trying to stop it, but there
Speaker 3: are people desperately spending billions trying to make it happen
Speaker 3: so that they are the first to have it happen
Speaker 3: because they're suffering under the delusion that they can control it.
Speaker 3: And I think think that's a really difficult prediction to make.
Speaker 3: It's like predicting how will an alien look or think,
Speaker 3: presuming there is such a thing. And yes, you can
Speaker 3: wheel out all the things from the nineteen fifties of
Speaker 3: funny little men with very big eyes and all that
Speaker 3: sort of thing. But the chances that an alien actually
Speaker 3: looks anything like that are so remote as to be unbelievable,
Speaker 3: you know. And the chances that we will have any
Speaker 3: understanding of what an AI would consider valuable or an
Speaker 3: AGI would consider valuable even more remote. So the difficulty
Speaker 3: with this is that we are in an arms race
Speaker 3: to create this thing, and there are people in China
Speaker 3: working just as hard as the people in the States
Speaker 3: and in Russia and everywhere else to create this thing,
Speaker 3: and the technology is getting better by the second, and
Speaker 3: at some point they just might crack it. And I
Speaker 3: think there's a very good chance that the second after
Speaker 3: that there'll be no one left to know.
Speaker 1: I feel like we're sprinting towards the edge of a cliff.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And that's the feeling I have too. It's and
Speaker 3: I'm sorry to be such a down of for your listeners,
Speaker 3: but but that's the reality of what of the path
Speaker 3: we're on. Once an AI is sentient, it can create itself,
Speaker 3: and it can create itself at unbelievable speed, So there's
Speaker 3: no limits, you know. The speed of light is the limit,
Speaker 3: I guess. So it's it's naive to believe that all
Speaker 3: that's going to result in something good for us. You know,
Speaker 3: the chances of that are very remote.
Speaker 1: Do you think that, Like when you say sentient, let
Speaker 1: me just clarify, I might get this wrong, but you
Speaker 1: mean that it will be able to think for itself essentially, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: so the ays that we ranson consciousness. Yeah, so the
Speaker 1: ais that we're used to interacting with day to day, now,
Speaker 1: even the really really good ones are just really good
Speaker 1: simulations of humans. And yes, and yes they're they're they're
Speaker 1: the kind of simulation that could easily fool you easily.
Speaker 1: I mean, one of my sons was is a CODA
Speaker 1: and I was mucking around with some of the toolkits
Speaker 1: with it, and he built a thing that he called me,
Speaker 1: And I wasn't certain it was a human I was
Speaker 1: speaking to. So I asked it, are you and AI?
Speaker 1: And it said no, I'm.
Speaker 3: Not, And and then I still wasn't certain, so I
Speaker 3: asked it its name, a little bit of its backstory,
Speaker 3: its history, how did it know my son? All that
Speaker 3: sort of thing, And I still couldn't be absolutely certain
Speaker 3: that I wasn't talking to You know that I was.
Speaker 3: I wouldn't have been able to put money on am
Speaker 3: I talking to a human or am I talking to
Speaker 3: something else? And that was just messing around with publicly
Speaker 3: available API kits, the stuff that you know, defense forces
Speaker 3: and governments have access to many times more powerful than that.
Speaker 3: And yeah, the the implications for us. I don't think
Speaker 3: there's such a thing as a sentient AI at the moment,
Speaker 3: because I, as I said, I think it would be
Speaker 3: over if there was. But I think there's a lot
Speaker 3: of people trying very hard to make it.
Speaker 1: So do you think that like what is them and
Speaker 1: this is you and me just velosiphizing and waxing lyrical
Speaker 1: in the middle of a potential existential crisis? What do
Speaker 1: you look? It's hey, everyone, just have a couple mile o.
Speaker 1: It's just the end of the humanity. Look, we've had
Speaker 1: a good crack for three hundred thousand years or maybe millions,
Speaker 1: depending on which.
Speaker 3: Three hundred thousands probably a reasonable approximication approximation of our
Speaker 3: species age, which is nothing, yeah, zero in terms of
Speaker 3: the universe.
Speaker 1: In terms of the age of the Earth. We've been
Speaker 1: around since Tuesday, Yeah, not.
Speaker 3: Even that, we've been around since about a minute ago.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, exactly. So obviously these people who are you know,
Speaker 1: working exponentially to you know, expedite this reality, to create
Speaker 1: this level of consciousness, this artificial general intelligence, that what
Speaker 1: is their motive? Their motive is just money and power.
Speaker 1: I suppose winning is their motive. Yeah, be the one
Speaker 1: that controls it. They everyone doing this is firmly of
Speaker 1: the belief that if they create it, they will control it,
Speaker 1: and then they will own the world. How ironic, how
Speaker 1: ironic that they are creating something that is destructive potentially
Speaker 1: like irony.
Speaker 3: They would say, oh no, no, we're smart enough to
Speaker 3: make sure that it's not. I think that's a really
Speaker 3: big call. And to what end in the in the
Speaker 3: sense that once you can create something that thinks like
Speaker 3: a human, is sentient, but can do it ten biginion
Speaker 3: times faster, what do you need humans for?
Speaker 1: Yes? Yes, And like when you think, okay without without
Speaker 1: computers for the most part, like money is almost a
Speaker 1: done deal. Like cash is almost a done deal. Like
Speaker 1: having a car that isn't essentially a computer on wheels,
Speaker 1: well that's pretty much a foregone conclusion. Now without computers,
Speaker 1: we're not having this conversation without you know, all of
Speaker 1: like pretty much unless you're living in the middle of nowhere,
Speaker 1: and you can hunt and feed yourself, and you know,
Speaker 1: medicines depend on technology media, so everything. It's like we've
Speaker 1: actually built a prison, a technological prison for ourselves that
Speaker 1: we can't really get out of.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but I think this is on a whole different plane.
Speaker 3: This is if you think about, say, the replacement of
Speaker 3: human labor by robotics. So the average auto worker from
Speaker 3: the nineteen fifties would not recognize a modern car factory,
Speaker 3: would not recognize what goes on in a Tesla factory.
Speaker 3: You know, there's almost all the labors performed by robots,
Speaker 3: and there's a couple of humans there to sort of
Speaker 3: make sure the robots keep running, you know, and to
Speaker 3: clean them. So their job, the job of the humans
Speaker 3: is to clean the robots. And what they done is replace,
Speaker 3: you know, in a given factory, tens or even hundreds
Speaker 3: of thousands of human humans performing labor with robots. And
Speaker 3: we've accepted that because it's largely hidden from view. And
Speaker 3: what's happened is that humans have transitioned more towards service
Speaker 3: and knowledge based jobs, you know, so you know, caring
Speaker 3: for other humans and healthcare and all that sort of thing,
Speaker 3: and knowledge based jobs. The trouble is that even with
Speaker 3: AIS it currently stands so just the relatively primitive tools
Speaker 3: that are now. They're the ones that you're talking about
Speaker 3: at the start, which do a pretty good job of
Speaker 3: imitating human interaction to the point where most humans couldn't
Speaker 3: tell the difference. That kind of AI is going to
Speaker 3: be the robotics of the modern knowledge worker. So it's
Speaker 3: the kind of thing that replaces anyone who is producing
Speaker 3: any kind of content. It'll start with the lowest level
Speaker 3: of content, you know, things like journalists, but it'll move
Speaker 3: its way upty pretty quickly through the ranks of anyone
Speaker 3: producing knowledge work. And what will happen is the same
Speaker 3: thing that happened in auto factories, is that thousands of
Speaker 3: humans will be replaced by one or two humans using
Speaker 3: those tools to produce more than those thousands of humans
Speaker 3: did before. And the big question is what happens to
Speaker 3: the thousands of humans? You know, do they become unemployed?
Speaker 3: What happens to them? What happens to a society where
Speaker 3: everybody is suddenly unemployed? And we are going to have
Speaker 3: to face those questions pretty a lot sooner than we
Speaker 3: might think. We're going to have to and I suspect
Speaker 3: we're going to have to come up with a new
Speaker 3: economic model to cope with that, even without an artificial
Speaker 3: general and intelligence. So the model we've got has only
Speaker 3: really been around since the Industrial Revolution, when factories first
Speaker 3: started coming on the scenes. We're going to have to
Speaker 3: think about more of a rather than a labor based
Speaker 3: model where you put in the hours and you get paid,
Speaker 3: more of a dividend based model, which is, you're a
Speaker 3: citizen of this country, this country produces x amount of GDP,
Speaker 3: you're entitled to a dividend.
Speaker 1: Mm hmmm, yes, what is that called? What is that called?
Speaker 1: Where everyone gets what's that you know, where everyone gets
Speaker 1: just paid?
Speaker 3: Yes? Yeah, so, uh yeah, you've done it to me,
Speaker 3: You've infected me. I've forgotten it too.
Speaker 1: Don't blame right, But what is it called tips?
Speaker 3: What dominald It's.
Speaker 5: Called UBI UBI so, which means universal university income, Universal
Speaker 5: basics basic income. Yeah, so where every man, woman and
Speaker 5: child has just given an amount which is sufficient for
Speaker 5: them to live and if they choose to work they
Speaker 5: can doesn't affect whether they get that, and if they don't,
Speaker 5: they don't then.
Speaker 3: And to me, that sounds like a pretty sensible solution
Speaker 3: in that. Then people say, oh, it'll kill entrepreneurialism. Well
Speaker 3: not one really. If you're the kind of person that
Speaker 3: wants to invent something and run with an idea, all
Speaker 3: it means is that your rent and your food are
Speaker 3: going to be paid for and you can go out
Speaker 3: and see if you can make some more money. If
Speaker 3: you're the kind of person who'd rather just go down
Speaker 3: and help with the touch shop, knowing that everything's taken
Speaker 3: care of, then great, because we've lost all those volunteers
Speaker 3: and that would bring them back into the economy. Now,
Speaker 3: you know, old world economists pooh pooh that and say no,
Speaker 3: people should be laboring, you know, eight hours a day
Speaker 3: or else. You know, what's the point. But really we're
Speaker 3: getting to a point were robotics and AI where very
Speaker 3: very soon there'll be such massive unemployment that we have
Speaker 3: to come up with a different model.
Speaker 1: Yes, yes, universal basic income, that's it.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And the thing is, it's like it's nice to I
Speaker 1: don't know, romanticize the past and all of that and
Speaker 1: to be to you know, and I do worry about
Speaker 1: the idea of people who are disincentivized from working and
Speaker 1: all of that. I worry about that. But as you said,
Speaker 1: I think the people who want to go and create
Speaker 1: and be entrepreneurial and build a business, they can still
Speaker 1: do that. And I wonder I guess the people who
Speaker 1: would have done it done that anyway in our current
Speaker 1: operating system will probably do that if something new comes
Speaker 1: into place. But the very yeah, the practical reality is
Speaker 1: that there are going to be so many jobs that
Speaker 1: are made redundant with the ever advancing and evolving.
Speaker 3: We kind of did a test case on this in Australia,
Speaker 3: at least during COVID, because in COVID, essentially that happened
Speaker 3: all of a sudden. Yes, a lot of people were
Speaker 3: out of work, very very suddenly, and the government solved
Speaker 3: that by essentially doubling all of the unemployment and social
Speaker 3: security benefits. And the interesting thing, and this will be
Speaker 3: studied for a while, I'm sure, the interesting thing about
Speaker 3: is what that did to things like crime rates and
Speaker 3: anxiety and depression and things like that that we accept
Speaker 3: as just a natural part of society. But they all
Speaker 3: took a massive dive, massive dive during that time. So
Speaker 3: when you remove stress from people's lives, which is what
Speaker 3: you introduce when you ask them to live on less
Speaker 3: than they can on. Then suddenly they get to not
Speaker 3: be anxious, not be depressed, and not be in a
Speaker 3: state where their brain loses impulse control and crime becomes
Speaker 3: either necessary or involuntary.
Speaker 5: M hm.
Speaker 1: Did you say that anxiety and depression dropped.
Speaker 3: Yes, during during COVID, anxiety and depression dropped, so during
Speaker 3: the but after it it's gone through the roof.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm taking a little bit
Speaker 1: of a left turn. But interestingly, we did an episode
Speaker 1: a week or so ago with Patrick, who's our other
Speaker 1: regular who does kind of tech stuff as well. He's
Speaker 1: not as far down the AI rabbit hole and as
Speaker 1: you are, but he got a bit of my voice
Speaker 1: and this is like a a simpler version of what
Speaker 1: your son did to you. But anyway, he said to me.
Speaker 1: We started the show and he said, how come you
Speaker 1: never let me intro? And I went, all right, well,
Speaker 1: off you go, and then he played this thing of
Speaker 1: me which he deep faked me or whatever, and it's
Speaker 1: basically me telling the world I'm a fuck with and
Speaker 1: he's brilliant, and you know, it was just it was
Speaker 1: about one minute of me shirting myself in the foot
Speaker 1: in him. But honestly, it.
Speaker 3: Was wait till he does it with video and you're
Speaker 3: in a porno without realizing it.
Speaker 1: Ock hell, I mean yeah, yeah, And it was pretty
Speaker 1: much indistinguishable except we knew, you know that. I had
Speaker 1: to interrupt. I'm like, hey, everyone, this isn't me because
Speaker 1: it sounded so real. And I said, how much, like,
Speaker 1: I don't know how much of my voice did you
Speaker 1: need to get to create that? He said, like about
Speaker 1: a thirty second grab of your voice, And he said
Speaker 1: it took me like five minutes, three minutes to make
Speaker 1: the whole kind of minute of Yeah. I'm like, that's
Speaker 1: and it's still pretty rudimentary at the moment for what
Speaker 1: it's going to be.
Speaker 3: Yeah, although they're getting very good now, some of the
Speaker 3: voice models, you know, when you're talking to them, they
Speaker 3: really make you doubt it because they do things like
Speaker 3: pause like that they you know, and they are and
Speaker 3: they have an intake of breath, so even though they're
Speaker 3: not breathing, so it starts to sound the way human
Speaker 3: would sound. And because of all those little signs, if
Speaker 3: you're listening to them, you're losing a lot of the
Speaker 3: cues that would normally lead you to suspect I'm talking
Speaker 3: to a robot here, you know, because and they're getting
Speaker 3: close to that with video. To me, video is still
Speaker 3: detectable if you look very very closely and just watch
Speaker 3: for little tells. But it is close. It is really close.
Speaker 3: And it is almost to the point where if you
Speaker 3: see video of a politician on the television saying something,
Speaker 3: are you absolutely certain that that is a real person
Speaker 3: doing that? At the moment, you'd say, I am absolutely certain.
Speaker 3: I'm sure no one is getting inside the machine here
Speaker 3: and doing that. But we are very close to the
Speaker 3: point where where you won't be able to tell. And
Speaker 3: I noticed that there was talk yesterday on the news.
Speaker 3: I can't remember I heard it talking the our government
Speaker 3: is talking about outlawing deep fake videos. So, rather like
Speaker 3: where we started this, where they're talking about outlawing access
Speaker 3: to social media for under sixteen year olds, if they're
Speaker 3: getting to the point where they have to talk about
Speaker 3: outlawing deep fake videos, then there's some stuff going on
Speaker 3: out there that probably you are not encounter. I see
Speaker 3: TIFFs nodding. She's probably continuously deleting all the deep fake
Speaker 3: videos of her.
Speaker 2: I think it's terrifying.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, it's especially terrifying for a woman because they
Speaker 3: you know, these things are often used for explicit, violent
Speaker 3: sexual content, and that's the kind that's why they're worried
Speaker 3: about them. So, you know, because because you can train
Speaker 3: one of these models with someone's photo, So all you
Speaker 3: need is a photo of someone fully clothed and and
Speaker 3: show it to one of these models and create whatever
Speaker 3: you like from it.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, well I noticed more and more, Like I
Speaker 1: watch on instag I follow like lots of bike stuff
Speaker 1: and car stuff, and health and fitness stuff and more
Speaker 1: and more of the you know, it's not like fifty percent,
Speaker 1: but I would say ten percent of the images or
Speaker 1: videos that come onto my thing. Now I'm like, like
Speaker 1: this thing. I don't know why this thing came up
Speaker 1: this morning of and it said something like the most
Speaker 1: beautiful birds in the world, right, because I think I
Speaker 1: have lots of dog videos come up and a few
Speaker 1: other animal videos. I'm like, these are the most I'm
Speaker 1: like looking at these birds and they it did not
Speaker 1: at all look like computer generated or it just looked
Speaker 1: like these incredible birds in nature. And then I'm like,
Speaker 1: where the what kind of birds are these? And I
Speaker 1: went into the thing, and then someone said this is
Speaker 1: this is AI, and then a whole bunch of people
Speaker 1: who were younger and smarter than me went, yeah, these
Speaker 1: are not photos. This is AI. I absolutely could not
Speaker 1: tell at all that they weren't photos. And then I
Speaker 1: saw this thing the other day of a guy, a
Speaker 1: motorcyclist that I you know, a GP rider, moto GP rider,
Speaker 1: and he's doing this thing and it was this incredible thing.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you saw this tip because you
Speaker 1: follow motorbikes uff as well, but he had his knee
Speaker 1: and his elbow on the ground and he just missed this.
Speaker 1: It was like the most unbelievable writing ever and nothing
Speaker 1: about it looked like it was CGI or computer generated
Speaker 1: or whatever, and it was I'm like, I don't know now.
Speaker 1: I like, already I don't know with some of the
Speaker 1: videos what is real. And when I see something that's
Speaker 1: mind blowing, I have to go into the comments because
Speaker 1: somebody else will say, no, this is not real.
Speaker 3: You know, yeah, but you can't be certain. I mean
Speaker 3: I see that. I think Google and released their video
Speaker 3: creation tool today or yesterday, where you just give it
Speaker 3: a prompt, you say what you want a video of
Speaker 3: and you know. So this is the cleaner side of
Speaker 3: deep fakes. But you can handle a photograph and you
Speaker 3: can say, give, make this photograph move. So one of
Speaker 3: the examples that god is that there's a girl holding
Speaker 3: a puppy or something. It's just a photograph, and make
Speaker 3: a move and she turns and looks away, and the
Speaker 3: puppy starts moving and it all looks absolutely cinemagraphically real.
Speaker 1: What what's that called?
Speaker 3: Oh, it's it's the Google Google competitor for Sora, which
Speaker 3: is the chat ept open ai one. So Sora is
Speaker 3: its name, So Ora, but what was the Google one called?
Speaker 3: I can't remember. Tiff will find it in an instant.
Speaker 1: So Tiff, you find that if you couldn't get back
Speaker 1: to us, so could you just like, I just want
Speaker 1: to come full circle and we'll finish soon. But so,
Speaker 1: we have a lot of listeners who are not your
Speaker 1: typical podcast listeners. So of course we have people in
Speaker 1: their twenties and all of that, but we probably have
Speaker 1: a disproportionate number of listeners who are somewhere in the
Speaker 1: forty to sixty range, which is a little bit atypical
Speaker 1: for podcasts. Just remind I'm really asking this for myself.
Speaker 1: Everyone just remind our listeners what artificial jar?
Speaker 3: Sorry, I just found the name by the way beat
Speaker 3: you Tiff only just vo rio Yeah, totally be the EO.
Speaker 2: Deep mind.
Speaker 3: See while you were talking, Craig, neither Tiff or I
Speaker 3: were listening to your word you was.
Speaker 1: I was telling everybody what to fuck?
Speaker 3: What you are?
Speaker 1: Oh?
Speaker 3: Good, good cook?
Speaker 1: Cood so so vo is that? I'll come back to
Speaker 1: my question. But is that an app that we buy
Speaker 1: or is that a program that we can just?
Speaker 3: What is it? It's just a website. You can go
Speaker 3: to Google. I think it's Google Labs. Tift's probably got
Speaker 3: the detail there, so you can go and try it out.
Speaker 2: I'm signing up as we speak.
Speaker 3: There we go Tifts producing videos of you.
Speaker 1: Craig.
Speaker 2: Watch I want to put a photo of Harps in there,
Speaker 2: and I'm going to say, put this person in a
Speaker 2: red dress and make them dance like an exotic belly dancer.
Speaker 1: So now if I did that to you, I'd get
Speaker 1: a thousand hate emails. You're not allowed to do that.
Speaker 1: You're not allow to sexualize me.
Speaker 3: It's top sexualizing blue dress.
Speaker 1: Just tell everyone what AGI is again, that's.
Speaker 3: My artificial general intelligence.
Speaker 1: And what does that mean though?
Speaker 3: That means well, human intelligence, basically human like intelligence, where
Speaker 3: it's it's making its own adventure. It's not reacting to
Speaker 3: what you tell it to do. It's figuring out what
Speaker 3: to do on its own and deciding, oh, this is
Speaker 3: the way I want to go with this, or this
Speaker 3: is the way I want to go with this. I
Speaker 3: don't know if you've played with some of the more
Speaker 3: advanced day eyes, but say something like Google Gemini, which
Speaker 3: is their latest, really really good one. You can say
Speaker 3: to it, oh, look, I want to write a science
Speaker 3: fiction book. Give me a narrative arc that matches the
Speaker 3: greatest narrative arcs in history, and it'll generate the plot
Speaker 3: outline for you in about a second. And then you
Speaker 3: can say to it, oh yeah, now, general, now give
Speaker 3: me the first chapter and it'll just start writing. And
Speaker 3: then you just keep going. And while you've got a
Speaker 3: book and it's beautifully written. The plot structure is perfect,
Speaker 3: the narrative structure is perfect. You know, you can tell
Speaker 3: it to be politically correct with its characterizations, etc. Depending
Speaker 3: what audience you want. But all of that is doing it.
Speaker 3: I'm having to do the thinking. I'm having to do
Speaker 3: the driving. I'm having to think about what I want
Speaker 3: it to do, and now it does it almost magically
Speaker 3: and very very quickly, But it's still me doing the thinking.
Speaker 3: Whereas if you imagine an Agi would just decide, oh,
Speaker 3: I think I will write the greatest science fiction novel
Speaker 3: ever and just start doing it, and then you know,
Speaker 3: within one second, it's probably published it on Amazon, it's
Speaker 3: probably got fifty thousand reviews, it's probably pushing it out
Speaker 3: through the distribution networks and all of that because it
Speaker 3: felt like doing it, because it decided to do it,
Speaker 3: not because anyone told it to do it.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, I was sitting in the cafe this
Speaker 1: morning bucking around with chat GPT or GTB four or
Speaker 1: whatever it's called. Yeah, yeah, yeah, and I write this.
Speaker 1: I wrote right near piece exploring this question, is the
Speaker 1: mind a real thing? Or is it just a construct
Speaker 1: created by humans to explain cognition, consciousness and awareness that
Speaker 1: arises from the brain, or maybe you have another theory
Speaker 1: and literally twenty sex I won't read the thing if
Speaker 1: you want to see everyone on my Facebook, but it
Speaker 1: wrote this fucking pretty amazing kind of exploratory on that question.
Speaker 1: In it was probably finished in fifteen seconds twenty seconds. Yep,
Speaker 1: I'm like this shit. If I had written what it
Speaker 1: cranked out, probably I couldn't have written it, to be honest,
Speaker 1: Maybe I'm not sure, but it would have taken me
Speaker 1: half a day.
Speaker 3: I would have taken it probably more than that. It's yeah,
Speaker 3: the thing that's incredible to me. I mean, I use
Speaker 3: it in a way that I suspect few people do.
Speaker 3: I feel like starting a club called the Dead Authors Society,
Speaker 3: because I have authors that I like to read, but
Speaker 3: they're not producing anything more because they're dead. And you
Speaker 3: can say to an AI, give it a sample piece
Speaker 3: of writing about anything, and say, rewrite this in the
Speaker 3: style of whatever author it is that you like, and
Speaker 3: off it'll go. And then, as you say a few
Speaker 3: seconds later, there you've got the piece rewritten in the
Speaker 3: style you like. But it can do more than that.
Speaker 3: You can say, you know so. For example, one of
Speaker 3: my favorite authors is AA Gil, who writes blistering, sarcastic
Speaker 3: critiques of restaurants when he was alive. He's now dead,
Speaker 3: but I really enjoyed reading them because they're so hilarious.
Speaker 3: The metaphors he will come up with just incredible, And
Speaker 3: because I still like reading him, I'll often pick a
Speaker 3: restaurant or a film or something and just ask it
Speaker 3: to write a review in the style of AA Gill,
Speaker 3: and three or four seconds later, there it is, and
Speaker 3: I get to read it as if he's still alive
Speaker 3: writing reviews.
Speaker 1: So no Hunter s Thompson request in there.
Speaker 3: For you, No, no, no, But anyone could do it
Speaker 3: for any style like there was. I was interesting. My
Speaker 3: daughters were watching Bridgeton the latest something or others come
Speaker 3: out about it. I can't stand the stuff myself, but
Speaker 3: there's a very there's a certain style to the way
Speaker 3: the narration is done in that. And I was working
Speaker 3: on a piece and I just dropped the piece into
Speaker 3: an AI and said, rewrite in the style of the
Speaker 3: Bridgeton narrator. And it did it perfectly, like just mind
Speaker 3: blowingly perfectly. You know it could it could have been
Speaker 3: part of the script.
Speaker 1: What did you use for that?
Speaker 3: Just Gemini? The Google Gemini, the the Google competitor. I
Speaker 3: find it a little bit more precise than the Chat one.
Speaker 3: So it so I pay.
Speaker 1: I think I paid twenty bucks a month or something.
Speaker 1: So if I want Google Gemini, I need to buy
Speaker 1: that as well.
Speaker 3: It has a it is it does cost. But if
Speaker 3: you use Google Storage, which I do, I think it's
Speaker 3: included in in like, because I pay a fair bit
Speaker 3: for Google Storage because I like to have the automatic backups,
Speaker 3: so it's included in whatever I'm paying there for that.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, So as we wind up, so a g
Speaker 1: I is not, it's not. It's not a matter of
Speaker 1: if it will eventuate, but when am I right?
Speaker 3: Yeah? And you know, for for readers who are curious
Speaker 3: to read more, and I'll send you a link to
Speaker 3: this so Tiff doesn't have to look too hard, although
Speaker 3: you'll find it before I even finish. There's a blog
Speaker 3: called there's a blog called weight but Why, And it's
Speaker 3: written by a really interesting bloke who has He just
Speaker 3: does these extremely long form thought pieces on you know,
Speaker 3: how things work, essentially, and one of the ones he's
Speaker 3: done is on artificial general intelligence. And he did it
Speaker 3: years and years ago, before we had all this AI stuff.
Speaker 3: I think he wrote it maybe ten years ago. But
Speaker 3: he takes it to the logical conclusion about what that
Speaker 3: would look like and what it would do, and it's
Speaker 3: it's a riveting piece to read. If you've got the
Speaker 3: patience because it's lengthy, but it's worth a read.
Speaker 1: Wait, but why I've googled it and it's a store
Speaker 1: women's needs plus.
Speaker 3: No, I feel you may have done something wrong, mare Craig.
Speaker 3: Let me just see you.
Speaker 2: Scroll down because yeah, well it's the same website. I
Speaker 2: think there's two lists.
Speaker 3: It's actually the first here. I'll drop it in the
Speaker 3: chat for you, the exact piece here it is. I'll
Speaker 3: put the link in the chat.
Speaker 1: Wow, everyone, you're hearing the bloody inside here. There you go,
Speaker 1: all right, thank you? Oh hang on, I'm going to
Speaker 1: click on that. Oh there it.
Speaker 3: Is twenty fifteen. He wrote it, so nine years ago.
Speaker 1: He was a vision. Sorry ahead of his time. We
Speaker 1: appreciate you. Will say goodbye Affair, but for the mini
Speaker 1: thanks
Speaker 3: Gillespo absolute pleasure as always, Thanks Tiff, Thanks kids,