3 ms·

I think an easy way to identify transformative technology is how strong people’s reaction is against it. I remember similar freak outs about the graphical Worl

I think an easy way to identify transformative technology is how strong people’s reaction is against it. I remember similar freak outs about the graphical World Wide Web, smart phone, etc. Somehow things are not quite so bad and considerably better than predicted, while still having negative side effects. Maybe an outcome will be knowledge will be better structured, ala Wolfram Alpha, and just depending on random text documents to encode knowledge won’t be as much a thing - similar to how we no longer use oral traditions to encode and disseminate knowledge. Who knows. But I doubt AI will fundamentally destroy society or knowledge or the internet or whatever. We will adapt, not just to preserve the way we did things, but to use the new things in a way that controls its side effects. It’ll of course be imperfect and some side effects can’t be controlled for. Some things just will cease to be a thing, like phone booths. While you can never have a bill and teds with a smartphone, it’s actually not the end of things. It’s just different. That’s how it works my friend. Life is impermanent, everything changes at all times, you can never recreate the past, and our suffering stems from our inability to let go of the way things are. Edit: I hate to bring it up, but maybe this is what the semantic web was waiting for.

banannaise 4y ago
> I think an easy way to identify transformative technology is how strong people’s reaction is against it. There is also strong negative reaction to technology that does incredible damage to society. This is just an excuse to ignore people pointing out issues.
- fnordpiglet 4y ago
  No, I don’t think so. I think I discussed that we would tackle the issues and some would be satisfied, some unresolved, and some ones we missed will emerge. I’m not saying the hyperbole cycle isn’t necessary or useful, I’m saying it indicates something significant. We couldn’t possibly resolve the issues identified if they weren’t identified to begin with. But I also think the bold predictions of what will go wrong are usually bold predictions of what could go wrong, and the very act of predicting it makes it less likely to actually occur. Finally, on a personal level getting bent out of shape about these things is pointless. We can identify challenges with new tech without it becoming a frantic exercise of hang wringing. Intentionally addressing issues knowing it’s happening regardless of your anxieties is a much more useful expenditure of energy, even if it doesn’t boost your blog/social media/impressions quite as much as hyperbolic hyperventilation.
93po 4y ago
I feel like semantic web and OP are two independent topics. Semantic web is about how content is delivered. OP is about the content itself.
Method-X 4y ago
I think this will push society toward better solutions to human verification. Probably through governments or their corporate proxies. Will that end up good or bad? I have no idea, but we'll find out soon.
l0b0 4y ago
This is the only semi-plausible positive take I've seen on ChatGPT. If we actually manage to move the world towards storing, presenting, and consuming facts in well-defined formats rather than long-form prose, that could possibly be an improvement on the current situation.

banannaise 4y ago

> I think an easy way to identify transformative technology is how strong people’s reaction is against it. There is also strong negative reaction to technology that does incredible damage to society. This is just an excuse to ignore people pointing out issues.

fnordpiglet 4y ago
No, I don’t think so. I think I discussed that we would tackle the issues and some would be satisfied, some unresolved, and some ones we missed will emerge. I’m not saying the hyperbole cycle isn’t necessary or useful, I’m saying it indicates something significant. We couldn’t possibly resolve the issues identified if they weren’t identified to begin with. But I also think the bold predictions of what will go wrong are usually bold predictions of what could go wrong, and the very act of predicting it makes it less likely to actually occur. Finally, on a personal level getting bent out of shape about these things is pointless. We can identify challenges with new tech without it becoming a frantic exercise of hang wringing. Intentionally addressing issues knowing it’s happening regardless of your anxieties is a much more useful expenditure of energy, even if it doesn’t boost your blog/social media/impressions quite as much as hyperbolic hyperventilation.

93po 4y ago

I feel like semantic web and OP are two independent topics. Semantic web is about how content is delivered. OP is about the content itself.

Method-X 4y ago

I think this will push society toward better solutions to human verification. Probably through governments or their corporate proxies. Will that end up good or bad? I have no idea, but we'll find out soon.

l0b0 4y ago

This is the only semi-plausible positive take I've seen on ChatGPT. If we actually manage to move the world towards storing, presenting, and consuming facts in well-defined formats rather than long-form prose, that could possibly be an improvement on the current situation.