4 ms·
AI Is an Insult Now
- akiselev 3y agohttps://archive.ph/fQgls https://archive.ph/fQgls
- hot_gril 3y agoThis has been a thing since 2019 at least.
- ilrwbwrkhv 3y agoThe problem that will always remain with AI is speciesism. Till the time we stop thinking of AI and machines as "lower" than humans, their output will always be looked at with a frown, no wonder how good it gets.
- candiodari 3y agoThe problem is that government and companies are using (REALLY) bad AI to not have to talk to people and to generally be unreachable. The problem is low-effort spam, and that every last actor in the economy is using that for "customer service".
- namaria 3y agoThe problem is that the AI label is being pinned on all sorts of automatic systems that share nothing except the fact that they are software driven. There is no AI, we stretched the symbol beyond all meaning. We need to discuss what and why we're automating stuff, and if the underlying logic is sound, on a case-by-case basis. Facial recognition to enforce arbitrary social rules via point based systems that revoke civil liberties, for example, is bad. It has nothing to do with the inherent value of some poorly defined "AI" concept.
- baremetal 3y agoThis is a specious argument. AI is not a species. What drives this need to deify AI?
- lowercased 3y ago> What drives this need to deify AI Humans seem to want to deify a lot of things. I think it's in our nature.
- kelseyfrog 3y agoConversely, what drives the need to other AI?
- curiousllama 3y agoBruh, it’s a rock
- kelseyfrog 3y agoExcept, it's not quite like a rock either.
- shrimp_emoji 3y agoIt's poisoned sand we taught to think!
- BanazirGalbasi 3y agoWith lightning!
- mrtranscendence 3y agoWhy do we “other” notepads, coffee cups, and more traditional statistical models? Current AI is not sentient, does not have wants or desires, and cannot experience pain or joy. I don’t think I need to give GT-4 the same respect I’d give a human (or a non-human animal).
- Simulacra 3y agoI disagree, the problem with AI will always be the human element programing it. So long as there is an human making moral or value judgements it will never be true AI. It's just a bot.
- klyrs 3y agoAlternative proposal: the better their output becomes, the more we have to frown about.
- yamtaddle 3y agoHuman output may merit some benefit-of-the-doubt if we don't initially understand it. Someone took time out of their life to create it, and presumably were attempting to convey some actual meaning. AI (at present) doesn't know what "meaning" even is. Generating mountains of output with it is cheap. Analyzing it is a trap—there's no other to try to understand and appreciate. It's an accident that happens to resemble something with intent behind it. I think that's part of why people react so poorly to it, and especially to trying to pass its output off as human-generated. (Spoilers for Watts' Blindsight) In Blindsight, the (intelligent but non-conscious) aliens think human communication is some kind of adversarial gibberish intended to mimic meaning in order to tie up opponents' resources with nonsense. Just chaff, basically. They're not able to understand the not-directly-and-strictly-business output of a consciousness as anything else, because they're used to a universe of intelligent but non-conscious actors. Today, that's what our AI tools actually do, as far as what they're capable of doing without extensive human adjustment and editing. They are, by far, at their most-efficient when used to generate noise. That noise may be useful for some purpose, but it's not any good purpose, because it's only useful at that kind of scale in cases where truth and meaning aren't valuable. [EDIT] For comparison, look at other forms of communication where humans go out of their way to avoid meaning. It's pretty much all reviled: marketing-speak, lawyer-speak, politician-speak, HR-speak, et c.
- mrtranscendence 3y agoI dispute that AI tools are not useful for any good purpose. I’ve had success with GPT-4 generating blocks of code where I’m not familiar with the relevant APIs. The code needs to be checked, of course, and doesn’t always work, but neither is it mere noise.
- yamtaddle 3y agoTo quote myself: > without extensive human adjustment and editing Current AI tools are a bit helpful if you're using them for "good". They're immensely helpful if you're using them for "ill" (spamming, scamming, astroturfing, et c.)
- JohnFen 3y agoWell, since people are living and AI is not, I think it's entirely justified to think of machines and AI as not being in the same category as humans or any other living thing. It's not being "speciesist", though, because AI is not a species.
- hot_gril 3y agoAnd also people created AI.
- hef19898 3y ago>> My colleague Spencer Kornhaber, writing about Ed Sheeran’s new album, surmised that its dull lyrics could’ve been composed by “a neural network trained on Sheeran’s past work.” Well, technically that is what happened? Besides the "artificial" bit of course.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- MadSudaca 3y agoMaybe he was just trying to communicate indirectly his dislike for the new album.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- quadrangle 3y agoThe comment you are replying to seems to be pointing out that Ed Sheeran himself, i.e. his own brain, is trained on the past work of Ed Sheeran. That's how I read it anyway.
- MadSudaca 3y agoYes, that's what I understood and why I said that maybe the author just doesn't like Ed Sheeran's music.
- hef19898 3y agoWell, Ed Sheeran self-trained himself, including positive feed-back on past work, on his own work. So in a sense, he still beats a Sheeran-bot! This no critique of Ed Sheerans work so, I actually do like his older albums. The last one didn't leave an impression so far to actually remember it.
- _rutinerad 3y ago
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- clnq 3y agoHuman use of AI is an insult to humanity. But that's a human problem, not a problem of the AI technology.
- qgin 3y ago* Roko’s Basilisk taking notes *
- Julesman 3y agoYawn. The PR campaign continues. If you haven't noticed, the mainstream (read: industrial) stance on generative AI is decidedly negative and there have been an absolutely unending stream of negative opinion pieces on it. None of them are particularly informative of even factual. Few, if any, are balanced in their perspective addressing the things people are using them for that are strongly positive. If I were to guess I'd say Blackrock execs and/or some NSA think tank decided that it was too disruptive of industrial influence and they want it regulated asap. For example... https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65746524 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65746524
- best_one_there 3y agoUntil GPT7, when it's better, and "this looks like it was an art project" is an insult :-(.
- droopyEyelids 3y agoIn this article "written by AI" has become shorthand for something thoughtless and uninspired “so carelessly and lifelessly cobbled together that we’re inclined to believe it’s the first film created entirely by AI." But in my own experience playing with ChatGPT, with the prompts I choose, GPT-4 can write stories that shocking, laugh-till-i-cry, and make me cry till I laugh. Sure I end up writing almost as much in prompts as I get back, but god damn it can write such fresh stuff, and fill in the things I have no experience with through it's exposure to such a wide range of humanity. If people are thinking these LLM tools are writing boring derivative stuff, it's because they're making boring and derivative prompts.
- slingnow 3y agoThe other option you may not have considered here is that you are immensely entertained by boring and derivative writing.
- tivert 3y ago> The other option you may not have considered here is that you are immensely entertained by boring and derivative writing. This. Whenever I see someone write glowingly of the output they get from generative AI, I know they are trying to complement the model, but my first thought is "wow, this person must have awful taste and embarrassingly little ability to evaluate quality." It reminds me of the 7-year-old me who non-sarcastically called McDonald's food a delicacy.
- itronitron 3y agosome people really like spin art
- droopyEyelids 3y agoThere's a chance that's true, but then wouldn't I be content with what's available on TV and in books, and I wouldn't need to spend all the time writing the prompts for LLMs?
- kieckerjan 3y agoIt is even happening in the sleepy field of literary criticism. In a review in a Dutch paper (part of) the new novel of a well-know Dutch author was compared to something ChatGPT would write. It was not meant as a compliment.
- stuckinhell 3y agoOnly by people in the arts.
- guardiangod 3y agoSame as calling something a Japanese knockoff 60 years ago, or a Chinese knockoff today. Or "dollar-store leftover", or "generic supermarket brand" Humans like to insult by comparing the target to something perceived to be inferior. AI is perceived to be inferior humans for most tasks, so we can be prejudice against AI (and without the discrimination societal pushback.) Wait till AI catches up, then "a Japanese knockoff" becomes a complement. Or AI becomes a societal group and you become a social pariah if you use their name in a mean-spirited way.
- bombcar 3y agoYou have to combine them - "this dollar-store discount-AI knockoff".
- Wiki39366 3y ago[dead]
- tivert 3y ago> Humans like to insult by comparing the target to something perceived to be inferior. AI is perceived to be inferior humans for most tasks, so we can be prejudice against AI (and without the discrimination societal pushback.) AI is inferior for most tasks, the "perception" is of that reality (e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/27/nyregion/avianca-airline-lawsuit-chatgpt.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/27/nyregion/avianca-airline-...). Software engineers love their technology, and often get defensive on its behalf and their sci-fi hopes for it. > Wait till AI catches up, then "a Japanese knockoff" becomes a complement. I hope for your and my sake it doesn't, because the best outcome of that is most people become useless and waste away on welfare. Because not only will their labor be irreverent, their cultural production will be too. The more likely outcome is economic immiseration for all those who have had their labor devalued, because that's what our social system is designed to create in those kinds of circumstances. And there's little hope that social system will chance for the better: if "AI" is effective enough that it "becomes a complement," it will be a powerful instrument of social control on behalf of the powers-that-be, and far more useful to them than to any insurgent.
- 3y ago
- rhyme-boss 3y agoHalf the comments here sound like they were written by an AI.
- maxdo 3y agowe will see lots of posts like this, that are trying to justify why human is better. I guess it's obvious it will cut liberal views a lot. I'm myself very liberal, but what GPT wave done... It opened eyes to many that human are not that unique including human writing. 0.0001% of what people write is actually "unique and fresh". Replace all the "insults" items from article with "journalists", and you will be surprised how many arguments applied to it.
- wg0 3y ago> People are already tired of machine-generated text, and they’re not afraid to say it. Plot twist - the article was generated by a private ChatGPT-5 private beta only provided to few as preview release.