For a start I would say this source is questionable. Does not look to me like a reliable source. Now, according to my sources (my clients working with vehicles and iot) it is true that statistics are used to determine how to act in presence of a group of person. Actually, others, such as railway operators in station or airports try to determine ‘the type’ of individuals in a crowd (according to their age, gender, size, probable origin and more) in order to set paterns for how a certain group of these people would move/occupy the space (and for other purposes that they do not wish us to discuss all too much 
) But I don’t think any of these big manufacturers or operators would base the decision taken by the AI on how much they ‘value’ (the life of) a group of people over another. This approach would be far too dangereous for a start and doesn’t make any sense in terms of resources & risk management.
To me, the process of creativity is nothing unleashed and is driven and influenced by our own experience, the environment and many other factors indeed. Though, when it comes to ‘design or creative thinking’, one needs to account all these parameters AND the goal… or it will not lead anywhere. I believe the AI correctly described the process of creativity a bit higher up in this thread.
So, in fact, we mostly do the same as the AI when it comes to our own creativity . Based on our experience, influence and environment we extrapolate the potential results of making a mix of it to achieve something that would match our vision or objective (or the request, if it is the AI). The problem I see here is that the AI can be ‘pushed’ into an environment and a pattern where it will no longer account a larger/extended view for finding new sources of creativity. For me, this is where the next challenge is all about ‘nurturing’ and ‘educating’ the AI. If I tell the AI that ‘blue is bad’, nothing willl happen. It might just reply that blue is a color and thus, is neither good nor bad. But what if out of 100 discussions, 90 would tell it that (for them) ‘blue is bad’? Will it continue to serve and value ‘blue’ in the exchanges we have with it (knowing that for us ‘blue is bad’).
To me, a credible source is one that can be verified. As far as I know, nobody today has been able to verify (and provide proof) that the AI implemented in an autonomous vehicle is making decisions based on the ‘value of life’ when facing ‘an obstacle’. At least, not just now and not until the next leak And may I add here that if it turns out to be this way, (my belief is that) the scandal will most likely cause the end of the company who did that. Of course, this is just my own assumption based on the current reaction of people for such things.
Pretty interesting!
skim reading through the thread I noticed HDRI tools and it brought to mind saw ths video just the other day :
I remember seeing a preview of ths a while back , basically takes doodle ideas you draw and replaces them with images it thinks match the doodles … something like that.
the other day while toyng around with ai conversation I was thinking about ways in which to get an idea of the weighting in the answers , so start of the question like this :
“in the least amount of words possible, say as much as possible when answering this question : …”
its interesting to see the results of some of this.
@shaderbytes to run Canvas 360 one needs a Nvidia card 
This brings me to the idea that we need hardware AI’s which can simulate any hardware configuration! 
A similar tool to create an image from a scetch is
found on this video Mind-blowing & Unbelievable Advancements in AI Tech this Week! (AI Art, Research, Mindreading) - YouTube
amazing! 
I didn’t test the hand tracker (I have no camera installed) but it seems a cool tool RDTR01 (xl.digital)
Don’t get me wrong. I love your questionning and your overall search for ‘meaning’, challenging ‘ethics’ and ‘philosophy’…etc. The kind of thing I love to discuss face-to-face around a beer in a pub. But, we live in a society, we have rules, laws, manners and habits that somehow need to be enforced to keep us from ‘anarchy’. And the exchanges that are made through the digital can be very harmful because they don’t come with all the background and cannot be instantly replied to. I cannot let one say something that is obviously not true, simply claiming that ‘truth’ is ‘relative’ or ‘cannot be verified’. This is sensationalism (entertainment at the best). If any manufacturer of autonomous vehicles would prove to use the AI in a manner that values a life over another to make decisions on whether the vehicle should just simply crush the obstacle/person or attempt to avoid it, I would be the first one to stand up against it. But until you got proof of this, to me, this is nothing else than a simple ‘distraction’ at the best. A fun moment used by the speaker to make the audience laugh and get their attention before starting with a new topic. It’s nothing more than a ‘speaker’s trick’ and in this case, I don’t find it very appropriate. Of course, my opinion only.
I assume you are referring to the video “umfahren vs. umfahren” from my previous post. Taken out of context, someone reading your response might assume you are attacking or criticizing me…which I personally couldn’t care less if someone agrees with me or not. I only see words!
In German, for those who don’t understand German, the word has an ambiguous meaning, namely “to run over” or “to drive around”.
I did not say that truth is not verifiable. Truth comes from perceiving. In German - the language of the gods (Deus-ch-land: lat. deus = God) - the connection between truth and perception is better seen: “wahr-heit” > “wahr-nehmen”.
That the perception depends on the perspective and attitude should be obvious with this: Is the handle at a cup left or right?
And yes, the perception is relative. An objective truth would be the sum of all relative truths, but would one be able to perceive this absolute truth at all? It is comparable with the colors from a light projector. If one mixes all colors, it results only in white.
I mean, before one starts to idolize the AI, one should think about what the fundamental definition is, which distinguishes us.
Precisely what I was saying about the dangers of making ‘statements’ in the digital. Yes, this is the video and this is the context and I wasn’t criticizing you by any means. And I do understand german, and I do find this intervention from the speaker ‘ambiguous’ and as I said, inappropriate.
Just so everyone knows I am not against having some fun (even in a ‘serious’ presentation) AS LONG AS IT IS CLEARLY STATED THAT THIS PART IS ‘FOR FUN ONLY’ : I quickly did the new proposal ‘FOR BUSINESS’ of the slide about ‘Sparing characters’. Of course, for fun only 
I guess I would have answered the same (if only just for the joke and keeping with ‘the mystery’) 
Nature is built so simply. The striving of man for more knowledge and control is unnatural.
You don’t have to know or be able to do everything, it’s enough to know how to get it!
Indeed. That’s usually where I start getting ‘bored’ and will want to start with something new 
I find it fascinating how most visions from science fiction movies/books became reality. This suggests that you can realize anything you can imagine.
Knowledge is nothing. Imagination is everything.
Since I know you like design and like to create spaces, @mawa, I can recommend the season Krypton. The story is unimaginative, but the interior and the futuristic environment are worth seeing.
haha. I always said that if you want to make a movie, you should make a ‘sci-fi’ movie. If it turns out to become reality, your work will be classified as a ‘work of anticipation’. Else, it will become a ‘cult’ serie. It’s a win-win
Cheating at the job interview… no problem as long as you can read fluently! 
