4 ms·

It’s funny to me that there is such a strong emotional response to progress in AI (e.g., ChatGPT). It really seems like it stems from a strong biological desire

It’s funny to me that there is such a strong emotional response to progress in AI (e.g., ChatGPT). It really seems like it stems from a strong biological desire to maintain the feeling that “humans are special” even if no one will state that outright. Banning generated art or text comes across as a last ditch hurdle on the way to the inevitable. I think it’s better just to embrace this head-on and address any problems early before they become a bigger problem in the future (bias, factual correctness, etc.) This stuff really has the potential to improve society; let’s not unnecessarily cripple it out of some misplaced sense of human uniqueness.

PurpleRamen 4y ago
This has nothing to do with biology vs computer. It's simply the fear to lose your place; getting replaced by the cheaper poorer solution even. It could be AI, it could be the younger worker fresh from college, or someone from another country. Those who have to lose, will fear.
omnicognate 4y ago
I'd suggest having a bit more respect for the people you disagree with. People are raising quite specific concerns about this technology and its potential impacts, and are doing so in a world that has been coping with the unintended consequences of new technologies since the industrial revolution. You may perfectly validly disagree with their concerns, but to ascribe them to an emotional need for humans to be "special" doesn't contribute to the debate. It's just incredibly condescending. You could do worse than to avoid making arguments of the form "your points are so wrong you can only possibly be making them out of spite/jealousy/insecurity/other" in all debates on principle.
rep_lodsb 4y ago
Maybe that is a reason for some people's negative reactions, but on the other hand there seems to be a lot of unwarranted enthusiasm from another crowd, who seem to think that Friend Computer will soon usher in an utopian age. What currently exists is far from a human-level AGI, and it's not likely that just making a few tweaks would even get closer to that goal. The model doesn't in any sense understand what it is writing, it generates text that is optimized for appearing as if there is intelligence behind it, as long as you don't read too closely. And while we don't have to fear a godlike superintelligence turning us into paperclips yet, there are a lot of potential negative consequences to this kind of limited AI, and very little of value to society. We don't need more efficient ways to generate bullshit or propaganda.

PurpleRamen 4y ago

This has nothing to do with biology vs computer. It's simply the fear to lose your place; getting replaced by the cheaper poorer solution even. It could be AI, it could be the younger worker fresh from college, or someone from another country. Those who have to lose, will fear.

omnicognate 4y ago

I'd suggest having a bit more respect for the people you disagree with. People are raising quite specific concerns about this technology and its potential impacts, and are doing so in a world that has been coping with the unintended consequences of new technologies since the industrial revolution. You may perfectly validly disagree with their concerns, but to ascribe them to an emotional need for humans to be "special" doesn't contribute to the debate. It's just incredibly condescending. You could do worse than to avoid making arguments of the form "your points are so wrong you can only possibly be making them out of spite/jealousy/insecurity/other" in all debates on principle.

rep_lodsb 4y ago

Maybe that is a reason for some people's negative reactions, but on the other hand there seems to be a lot of unwarranted enthusiasm from another crowd, who seem to think that Friend Computer will soon usher in an utopian age. What currently exists is far from a human-level AGI, and it's not likely that just making a few tweaks would even get closer to that goal. The model doesn't in any sense understand what it is writing, it generates text that is optimized for appearing as if there is intelligence behind it, as long as you don't read too closely. And while we don't have to fear a godlike superintelligence turning us into paperclips yet, there are a lot of potential negative consequences to this kind of limited AI, and very little of value to society. We don't need more efficient ways to generate bullshit or propaganda.