4 ms·
This feels like well-trodden ground. AI-skeptic: "I can come up with AN example where an AI is worse than an encyclopedia, and it's confident! Burn it all down
by zug_zug 3y ago
This feels like well-trodden ground.
AI-skeptic: "I can come up with AN example where an AI is worse than an encyclopedia, and it's confident! Burn it all down! Hallucinations!"
AI-user: "I literally couldn't care less about that. It's more accurate than any person I know personally on almost every topic and makes code that works 70% of the time in 5 seconds."
- Karrot_Kream 3y agoSame old social media slap fight just HN's version. (Because we aren't Reddit :)
- grumpyprole 3y ago> Worse than an encyclopedia That's a gross understatement. I'd prefer something like "misinformation presented as truth"
- jnsaff2 3y agoIn here though the skeptic is providing a useful service in which they educate the user about edge cases (or properties) that the user might not be aware of. You know, being well informed beyond marketing materials. The user then might demand action from the service provider thereby improving the service. Instead of you know, yolo.
- QuadrupleA 3y agoIt's clear from the framing what side you're on :) I find them tremendously useful but the bullshitting, prudishness, bland mainstream views on everything, etc. can be quite irritating.
- rsynnott 3y agoI mean, if you wanted to know who Tim Bray is, based on the example, you’d be a lot better Googling, as the magic robot was completely wrong. Like, we have the internet. You don’t have to ask people you know personally! You can look stuff up! And yes, it clearly is worse than an encyclopedia. And we have those!