4 ms·
> Why not give the masses the same writing skills as a first year university student? Except this is not giving the masses the same writing skills as a first y
by haswell 3y ago
> Why not give the masses the same writing skills as a first year university student?
Except this is not giving the masses the same writing skills as a first year university student. It’s giving them a centrally controlled service that generates text.
Depending on the context, this is an extremely important distinction.
I still think LLMs are useful, but I don’t think it’s fair to say they’re giving their users writing skills any more than running a chess AI is teaching a person to play chess.
- version_five 3y agoIt's worse than that because "giving it to the masses" actually means telling people how to think. It's not like current chatbots represent a broad range of viewpoints, it's the median of the internet censored by coastal US tech values. Giving it to people is arguably the worst kind of missionary work or colonialism or whatever you want to call it.
- klyrs 3y agoI believe it's called an idiocracy.
- why_only_15 3y agoIf it's so bad, people can just choose not to use it!
- johnnyworker 3y agoThe minds of the people who depend on it will atrophy. Will they accept that and leave the rest alone? Will they even be able to understand what they lost? A casual glance at the world around me tells me no, of course not.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- raincole 3y ago> running a chess AI is teaching a person to play chess. Chess AI is exactly why today's GMs are so young and so strong compared to earlier GMs. It commoditized high-level matches.