6 ms·

It's not that nobody can see this coming, or that it's not a fair concern to have, but we should wait and see what happens. AI may be the great equalizer after

It's not that nobody can see this coming, or that it's not a fair concern to have, but we should wait and see what happens. AI may be the great equalizer after a period of adjustment. Let's face it, the internet in its current state is already full of get-rich-quick schemes and bad information. What people are proposing about ChatGPT is nothing new except that fewer humans are involved. If the output of ChatGPT truly makes the internet worse, the market may adjust. If the overall value of online content goes down as a result, then there may be less incentive to make shitty content that hasn't been fact checked, or there will specifically be a greater market for content that's been crafted and edited carefully. People may lose their taste for guzzling down garbage content if the garbage stinks too badly, and that would be a good thing. On the other hand, maybe ChatGPT does help more people produce better content, and creates opportunities for more people to make money by removing more barriers to entry. We do not actually know, yet. What we've experienced up to this point is a flash in the pan, and we ain't seen nothin' yet.

pixl97 4y ago
>but we should wait and see what happens. Most AI alignment and safety people would disagree with you there. Robert Miles - 10 Reasons to Ignore AI Safety. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i1WlcCudpU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i1WlcCudpU
- valine 4y ago
  It’s hard to know what’s real and what’s hysteria when the field is so fast moving. Mass hysteria is well documented and experts aren’t necessarily immune. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_hysteria_cases https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_hysteria_cases I’d also argue it’s hard to call anyone an expert in AI safety when the very definition of AI is still so ill defined.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ravenstine 4y ago
  So? We should manage the application of AI. Accepting that the toothpaste can't be put back in the tube isn't the same thing as ignoring AI safety. Researchers don't know everything, and we're treating people's opinions as facts when they're anything but. Ultimately, the only way we're going to find the answers is not by constantly ruminating but by waiting to see what's going to happen. Also, the examples that guy is using are hardly comparable. Contemplating overpopulation on Mars is not applicable to the real world. Contemplating how to manage the consequences of AI is. We are so far from so much as stepping foot on Mars that it's pretty ridiculous that someone thinks it's valuable to dedicate time to Martian overpopulation.
  - pixl97 4y ago
    You want to know how I know that you didn't actually listen to the content of the video? But hey, go on and ignore AI safety researchers pointing out the alignment issues we are already experiencing.
    - ravenstine 4y ago
      Snarky, much? I'm sorry that I apparently didn't get the point of your video. Again, with the "ignore" thing. You brought that word into the conversation, not I. There's a world of difference between ignoring ideas and not blindly listening to ideas as if they have a completely factual basis. And no, I'm not interested in what you're thinking I did with the lack of respect you bring here. I'd be fine continuing the discussion if you drop the assumption you're making of me.

pixl97 4y ago

>but we should wait and see what happens. Most AI alignment and safety people would disagree with you there. Robert Miles - 10 Reasons to Ignore AI Safety. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i1WlcCudpU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i1WlcCudpU

valine 4y ago
It’s hard to know what’s real and what’s hysteria when the field is so fast moving. Mass hysteria is well documented and experts aren’t necessarily immune. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_hysteria_cases https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_hysteria_cases I’d also argue it’s hard to call anyone an expert in AI safety when the very definition of AI is still so ill defined.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ravenstine 4y ago
So? We should manage the application of AI. Accepting that the toothpaste can't be put back in the tube isn't the same thing as ignoring AI safety. Researchers don't know everything, and we're treating people's opinions as facts when they're anything but. Ultimately, the only way we're going to find the answers is not by constantly ruminating but by waiting to see what's going to happen. Also, the examples that guy is using are hardly comparable. Contemplating overpopulation on Mars is not applicable to the real world. Contemplating how to manage the consequences of AI is. We are so far from so much as stepping foot on Mars that it's pretty ridiculous that someone thinks it's valuable to dedicate time to Martian overpopulation.
- pixl97 4y ago
  You want to know how I know that you didn't actually listen to the content of the video? But hey, go on and ignore AI safety researchers pointing out the alignment issues we are already experiencing.
  - ravenstine 4y ago
    Snarky, much? I'm sorry that I apparently didn't get the point of your video. Again, with the "ignore" thing. You brought that word into the conversation, not I. There's a world of difference between ignoring ideas and not blindly listening to ideas as if they have a completely factual basis. And no, I'm not interested in what you're thinking I did with the lack of respect you bring here. I'd be fine continuing the discussion if you drop the assumption you're making of me.