4 ms·

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 wil

by 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.
    - the_af 4y ago
      I understand your point of view, but writing novels is an activity that is enjoyable for humans. This to me feels like "we developed an AI that enjoys food better than humans": do we need an automated improvement in food-enjoyment? Think about whatever you enjoy doing: what if computers do it better, and become cheaper and faster at it, and you are no longer necessary? Sure, you could do it for your mom or partner to see, I guess. Disappointing, isn't it? Now repeat for every conceivable hobby or human activity. Do you see where I'm going? > access to better novels Are current novels bad? Do we have a lack of novels? Does the process of novel-writing need "disruption" by AI? Is mankind complaining, "if only we had more and better novels"?
CatWChainsaw 4y ago
Mass existential crisis, despair, I wouldn't be surprised if in the 2030s mass, um, self-terminating events become widespread.
krapp 4y ago
>..what's left for us, then? Consuming the culture manufactured by the autonomous corporations that generate our reality so the capitalist class can afford their orbital pleasure domes and stem-cell purees.
- the_af 4y ago
  I was thinking something like it, only a bit less scifi: we become consumers. Not like today, but worse: exclusively consumers of stuff automated processes produce. We won't create anymore; at best it'll be "computer, entertain me!". I really don't like that future.
  - krapp 4y ago
    The really scary part is, if the dopamine hit is good enough, we won't even care.

by the_af 4y ago

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.
  - the_af 4y ago
    I understand your point of view, but writing novels is an activity that is enjoyable for humans. This to me feels like "we developed an AI that enjoys food better than humans": do we need an automated improvement in food-enjoyment? Think about whatever you enjoy doing: what if computers do it better, and become cheaper and faster at it, and you are no longer necessary? Sure, you could do it for your mom or partner to see, I guess. Disappointing, isn't it? Now repeat for every conceivable hobby or human activity. Do you see where I'm going? > access to better novels Are current novels bad? Do we have a lack of novels? Does the process of novel-writing need "disruption" by AI? Is mankind complaining, "if only we had more and better novels"?

CatWChainsaw 4y ago

Mass existential crisis, despair, I wouldn't be surprised if in the 2030s mass, um, self-terminating events become widespread.

krapp 4y ago

>..what's left for us, then? Consuming the culture manufactured by the autonomous corporations that generate our reality so the capitalist class can afford their orbital pleasure domes and stem-cell purees.

the_af 4y ago
I was thinking something like it, only a bit less scifi: we become consumers. Not like today, but worse: exclusively consumers of stuff automated processes produce. We won't create anymore; at best it'll be "computer, entertain me!". I really don't like that future.
- krapp 4y ago
  The really scary part is, if the dopamine hit is good enough, we won't even care.