4 ms·

I'm starting to worry that we're going to run pretty short of activities humans find fulfilling to do, that have any notable amount of extrinsic reward or value

I'm starting to worry that we're going to run pretty short of activities humans find fulfilling to do, that have any notable amount of extrinsic reward or value. What happens when the computer does tell better stories to your kids than you do? When you turn the computer loose on them for a week and, well, god damn, by the end of the week they seem to have taken exactly the lessons they needed and are bringing them up in real-life situations and are even getting better at reading themselves, and raving about how good the stories are, and you can't deny that if you'd done it, the results wouldn't have been as good? Now repeat for all the ways that humans find it satisfying to serve others using their creativity. I very much doubt it's healthy for all the things we find fulfilling and enjoyable to have only intrinsic motivation to drive them. It's hard to turn down better outcomes, but what if a side-effect is that as a species we become psychologically (even spiritually, if you will) lost? So kids are raised more effectively—but for what? So that all the things they enjoy doing are valuable to, and needed or wanted by, exactly no-one? So we get more efficient at producing goods and entertainment—for what? So the brushes and paints we buy for our paintings that nobody cares to see and that your talentless cousin can outdo—in every way, including sublimity and mood and all that—with a lazy prompt on some future image generator, are somewhat cheaper? What's the point?

the_af 4y ago
Everything you mentioned worries me. > What happens when the computer does tell better stories to your kids than you do? Others have answered "but ChatGPT will never get as good at this". Let's, for the sake of argument, suppose that it does: suppose ChatGPT does get better. What then? Why is it a net win for mankind that a computer program can tell better (or "good enough") stories? If mechanical tasks get done by machines, and creative tasks get done by machines, and games get played by machines, and everything under the sun gets done by machines... ...what's left for us, then? Writing is an enjoyable activity for humans. It's not something to "optimize", it's fine as it is. If we optimize humans out of the activity of writing (or composing music, or drawing, etc), have we truly "won"?
- SamPatt 4y ago
  What's left for us is whatever we want to do. People still do all kinds of things which machines and computers can do better than we can. No reason to think that will change.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    That's exactly my point about the extrinsic vs. intrinsic motivation. Of course we can still do whatever we want, we can just no longer count even as much as we can now (which is already much reduced by e.g. recording and broadcast or mass manufacturing) on anyone else caring about it, needing it, or wanting it. I think being able to feel like one's work and creativity are genuinely wanted and needed by others in one's family, friend circle, and community is probably pretty psychologically important to people. It looks like all that's going to be left of that is some very-forced variety, and even that, not to most people—the organic need and desire for other people's creativity and effort may soon be sharply reduced, even further.
  - the_af 4y ago
    My question is precisely that, what will we want to do if computers do everything, including writing, reading, critiquing, buying, selling and stealing art? We will be left to ponder our existence and meaning in the vastness of the cosmos? Nope: in this hypothetical future, computers will also be better at that than us. I'm not threatened by computers if they can design a car, or write a better programs (though my livelihood is threatened for obvious reasons). But why would I want computers writing novels? What is there for me to gain, as a human? (I'm specifically excluding the "wow, this tech is amazing" angle from it. I'm also amazed by ChatGPT.)
    - SamPatt 4y ago
      If computers are better at writing novels than humans then what you gain is access to better novels. I enjoy reading novels, and I wouldn't refuse to read an excellent one because a computer wrote it.
      - 4y ago

the_af 4y ago

Everything you mentioned worries me. > What happens when the computer does tell better stories to your kids than you do? Others have answered "but ChatGPT will never get as good at this". Let's, for the sake of argument, suppose that it does: suppose ChatGPT does get better. What then? Why is it a net win for mankind that a computer program can tell better (or "good enough") stories? If mechanical tasks get done by machines, and creative tasks get done by machines, and games get played by machines, and everything under the sun gets done by machines... ...what's left for us, then? Writing is an enjoyable activity for humans. It's not something to "optimize", it's fine as it is. If we optimize humans out of the activity of writing (or composing music, or drawing, etc), have we truly "won"?

SamPatt 4y ago
What's left for us is whatever we want to do. People still do all kinds of things which machines and computers can do better than we can. No reason to think that will change.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  That's exactly my point about the extrinsic vs. intrinsic motivation. Of course we can still do whatever we want, we can just no longer count even as much as we can now (which is already much reduced by e.g. recording and broadcast or mass manufacturing) on anyone else caring about it, needing it, or wanting it. I think being able to feel like one's work and creativity are genuinely wanted and needed by others in one's family, friend circle, and community is probably pretty psychologically important to people. It looks like all that's going to be left of that is some very-forced variety, and even that, not to most people—the organic need and desire for other people's creativity and effort may soon be sharply reduced, even further.
- the_af 4y ago
  My question is precisely that, what will we want to do if computers do everything, including writing, reading, critiquing, buying, selling and stealing art? We will be left to ponder our existence and meaning in the vastness of the cosmos? Nope: in this hypothetical future, computers will also be better at that than us. I'm not threatened by computers if they can design a car, or write a better programs (though my livelihood is threatened for obvious reasons). But why would I want computers writing novels? What is there for me to gain, as a human? (I'm specifically excluding the "wow, this tech is amazing" angle from it. I'm also amazed by ChatGPT.)
  - SamPatt 4y ago
    If computers are better at writing novels than humans then what you gain is access to better novels. I enjoy reading novels, and I wouldn't refuse to read an excellent one because a computer wrote it.
    - 4y ago