3 ms·

The long term impact of the ease of generating low nutrition digital content using language models may be that people put down their devices and return to the r

The long term impact of the ease of generating low nutrition digital content using language models may be that people put down their devices and return to the real world. We’re already far down that path with the existing internet where most content is generated for SEO. Anything you’re consuming on the internet or even on a TV may just be random noise generated by some model so why waste your precious time consuming it? On the flip side why waste your time producing content if it’s going to be drowned in a sea of garbage mashed together by some language model?

TheMaskedCoder 4y ago
> The long term impact of the ease of generating low nutrition digital content using language models may be that people put down their devices The problem is people don't always make the wise decision. Evidence: the junk food industry is alive and kicking. Some people will disconnect from devices, but others may just say "this is the way things are now" and adjust themselves to the flavor of junk content.
- alkjsdlkjasd 4y ago
  Why are you assuming that it will make writing worse not better? Just because it can be used by non-experts to create crappy written work, it can also be used by people who work with it to augment and improve their existing writen work. To my mind AI is a general purpose technology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General-purpose_technology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General-purpose_technology I guess using this mental model, what you are worried about is the equivilent to pollution? Did the printing press also increase the amount of crap in circulation?
  - dazc 4y ago
    > Did the printing press also increase the amount of crap in circulation? I think the answer is, undoubtedly, yes.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    << Did the printing press also increase the amount of crap in circulation? << Why are you assuming that it will make writing worse not better? Both of these are fascinating questions and, to me anyway, both can be answered with yes. The sheer amount of writing increased exponentially once more people could read, write and publish their own writings ( and internet only exacerbated this trend ). I accordance with pareto principle, most of it was of poor quality, but the upside was that good output likely did increase in terms of absolute number as well ( few people are bound to write something decent ). I think parent is looking back at history and reasonably infers potential results ( more crap ).
CuriouslyC 4y ago
We need content curation AI to catch up with content generation AI.

TheMaskedCoder 4y ago

> The long term impact of the ease of generating low nutrition digital content using language models may be that people put down their devices The problem is people don't always make the wise decision. Evidence: the junk food industry is alive and kicking. Some people will disconnect from devices, but others may just say "this is the way things are now" and adjust themselves to the flavor of junk content.

alkjsdlkjasd 4y ago
Why are you assuming that it will make writing worse not better? Just because it can be used by non-experts to create crappy written work, it can also be used by people who work with it to augment and improve their existing writen work. To my mind AI is a general purpose technology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General-purpose_technology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General-purpose_technology I guess using this mental model, what you are worried about is the equivilent to pollution? Did the printing press also increase the amount of crap in circulation?
- dazc 4y ago
  > Did the printing press also increase the amount of crap in circulation? I think the answer is, undoubtedly, yes.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  << Did the printing press also increase the amount of crap in circulation? << Why are you assuming that it will make writing worse not better? Both of these are fascinating questions and, to me anyway, both can be answered with yes. The sheer amount of writing increased exponentially once more people could read, write and publish their own writings ( and internet only exacerbated this trend ). I accordance with pareto principle, most of it was of poor quality, but the upside was that good output likely did increase in terms of absolute number as well ( few people are bound to write something decent ). I think parent is looking back at history and reasonably infers potential results ( more crap ).

CuriouslyC 4y ago

We need content curation AI to catch up with content generation AI.