5 ms·

The problem is, vast majority of smartphone usage is done for entertainment and social networking purposes (IG, TikTok, Twitter, HN, gaming, Netflix and etc.).

by kredd 2y ago

The problem is, vast majority of smartphone usage is done for entertainment and social networking purposes (IG, TikTok, Twitter, HN, gaming, Netflix and etc.). If you’re mostly scrolling and consuming, I can’t imagine how current AI tooling can help you other than some summarization of texts. Sure, for productivity cases it might be legitimate, but that’s not what supermajority of people use a phone for.

mvdtnz 2y ago
No, the problem is that "AI" just isn't any good at almost anything.
- kredd 2y ago
  You can argue that, but there are legitimate "AI" workflows that have already been adapted in workplaces where things function well enough. I'm sure 99% of it is just slop, most companies will fail, but some things will survive, become commoditized and taken for granted in about 5 years.
paul7986 2y ago
Im not sure people really know how to use an AI chat bot or understand its a more powerful, quicker and personally more fun way of getting information then just a Google search Some personal examples of how I find it more useful (love to hear yours) and fun to use.... - Wanted to go on a hike an hour away from where both my friend (lives two hours west of me) and I live. Asked GPT what are some good hikes an hour drive away from both of us to meet & hike. With Google I have to do Many searches where GPT just provides the answer right away. - I count calories and eat out everyday. GPT knows the calories of everything i eat as I eat at chains mostly (Cava, Panera, Starbucks, Chipolte). I tell it via voice what i just ate for my 1st meal, it calculates my calorie count and later I'll tell it what im having for my 2nd meal. It can also recall my calorie count from days ago. It does all this quickly vs. Google i'd have to do oodles of searches. Usually Im using GPT the most when driving via voice and unlike Siri, GPT understands me and i can have whole conversations with it to get things done while driving.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  > Im not sure people really know how to use an AI chat bot or understand its a more powerful, quicker and personally more fun way of getting information then just a Google search I can't speak to your personal entertainment experience, but AI chatbots are generally a slower, less accurate way of getting information than a google search. (Though Google polluting search results with a big, often inaccurate, AI result at the top narrows this a bit.)
  - paul7986 2y ago
    If you use it for research where you have to do many google searches vs. just ask one question like hiking question it's much quicker asking one question vs. multiple google searches to get ur answer.
    - dragonwriter 2y ago
      The thing is it isn't reliable enough to rely on the answer from just one question for anything that matters.
      - williamcotton 2y ago
        I don't really understand why it is acceptable to speak for others on this topic. It is fine if it doesn't work well for you. It is also fine if it works well for others. These blanket statements lead to flame wars.
        paul7986 2y ago
        Sure it does for some...just how another perceives a reply. Im cool with their reply. For me with the two research examples of using GPT I gave/use it for the information is accurate. My friend and I have driven an hour away (for both) a few times (different spots) and hiked. Same goes for calories GPT has in it's knowledge base for well known chains. If it wasnt a chain restaurant GPT might not have it in it's knowledgebase or possibly have it wrong.
rbanffy 2y ago
> If you’re mostly scrolling and consuming Imagine an AI that popped up when you are reading something and warned you that information is false. For instance, imagine something like https://theconversation.com/can-ai-talk-us-out-of-conspiracy-theory-rabbit-holes-238580 https://theconversation.com/can-ai-talk-us-out-of-conspiracy... helping people discern about news and propaganda.
- acdha 2y ago
  That’d be useful but I’m pretty sure they’d get a massive backlash on Fox News and lawsuits filed alleging “being cancelled” within minutes of that shipping. It’s something we need but our current disinformation problem isn’t an accident but the result of decades of investment. The less fraught one is warning users that they’re being scammed: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/05/google-wants-ai-to-listen-to-your-phone-calls-detect-scam-callers/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/05/google-wants-ai-to-l...
- bradyd 2y ago
  Why would you trust AI, something that regularly makes stuff up, to be able to accurately determine that?
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    I trust a defective AI a lot more than I trust Fox News ;-) Now, more seriously, it'd need to put together a coherent argument and back it up with reputable sources, as just citing sources is very ineffective. The article I cited gives more details on possible approaches to that.
    - jajko 2y ago
      People eternally hoping that some new trick will finally make the other people understand how their side of the story/argument is one and only truly truthful. I guess this is old as mankind. With your argument, the problem happens when given person goes to Fox news in the first place. Selection of the source has already been made, with its biases. Not much you can do or expect after this point. Also, who curates the curator? Again an age old problem with no real, long term working solution in sight. No, you should not expect some statistical model to hold your hand through vast internet, while giving up any form of critical thinking, reasoning, or I guess any cerebral process altogether. Ultimate laziness. Since we know how much money there is in diet fad business, its safe to say this above will find its non-tiny desperate crowd.

by kredd 2y ago

mvdtnz 2y ago

No, the problem is that "AI" just isn't any good at almost anything.

kredd 2y ago
You can argue that, but there are legitimate "AI" workflows that have already been adapted in workplaces where things function well enough. I'm sure 99% of it is just slop, most companies will fail, but some things will survive, become commoditized and taken for granted in about 5 years.

paul7986 2y ago

Im not sure people really know how to use an AI chat bot or understand its a more powerful, quicker and personally more fun way of getting information then just a Google search Some personal examples of how I find it more useful (love to hear yours) and fun to use.... - Wanted to go on a hike an hour away from where both my friend (lives two hours west of me) and I live. Asked GPT what are some good hikes an hour drive away from both of us to meet & hike. With Google I have to do Many searches where GPT just provides the answer right away. - I count calories and eat out everyday. GPT knows the calories of everything i eat as I eat at chains mostly (Cava, Panera, Starbucks, Chipolte). I tell it via voice what i just ate for my 1st meal, it calculates my calorie count and later I'll tell it what im having for my 2nd meal. It can also recall my calorie count from days ago. It does all this quickly vs. Google i'd have to do oodles of searches. Usually Im using GPT the most when driving via voice and unlike Siri, GPT understands me and i can have whole conversations with it to get things done while driving.

dragonwriter 2y ago
> Im not sure people really know how to use an AI chat bot or understand its a more powerful, quicker and personally more fun way of getting information then just a Google search I can't speak to your personal entertainment experience, but AI chatbots are generally a slower, less accurate way of getting information than a google search. (Though Google polluting search results with a big, often inaccurate, AI result at the top narrows this a bit.)
- paul7986 2y ago
  If you use it for research where you have to do many google searches vs. just ask one question like hiking question it's much quicker asking one question vs. multiple google searches to get ur answer.
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    The thing is it isn't reliable enough to rely on the answer from just one question for anything that matters.
    - williamcotton 2y ago
      I don't really understand why it is acceptable to speak for others on this topic. It is fine if it doesn't work well for you. It is also fine if it works well for others. These blanket statements lead to flame wars.
      - paul7986 2y ago
        Sure it does for some...just how another perceives a reply. Im cool with their reply. For me with the two research examples of using GPT I gave/use it for the information is accurate. My friend and I have driven an hour away (for both) a few times (different spots) and hiked. Same goes for calories GPT has in it's knowledge base for well known chains. If it wasnt a chain restaurant GPT might not have it in it's knowledgebase or possibly have it wrong.

rbanffy 2y ago

> If you’re mostly scrolling and consuming Imagine an AI that popped up when you are reading something and warned you that information is false. For instance, imagine something like https://theconversation.com/can-ai-talk-us-out-of-conspiracy-theory-rabbit-holes-238580 https://theconversation.com/can-ai-talk-us-out-of-conspiracy... helping people discern about news and propaganda.

acdha 2y ago
That’d be useful but I’m pretty sure they’d get a massive backlash on Fox News and lawsuits filed alleging “being cancelled” within minutes of that shipping. It’s something we need but our current disinformation problem isn’t an accident but the result of decades of investment. The less fraught one is warning users that they’re being scammed: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/05/google-wants-ai-to-listen-to-your-phone-calls-detect-scam-callers/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/05/google-wants-ai-to-l...
bradyd 2y ago
Why would you trust AI, something that regularly makes stuff up, to be able to accurately determine that?
- rbanffy 2y ago
  I trust a defective AI a lot more than I trust Fox News ;-) Now, more seriously, it'd need to put together a coherent argument and back it up with reputable sources, as just citing sources is very ineffective. The article I cited gives more details on possible approaches to that.
  - jajko 2y ago
    People eternally hoping that some new trick will finally make the other people understand how their side of the story/argument is one and only truly truthful. I guess this is old as mankind. With your argument, the problem happens when given person goes to Fox news in the first place. Selection of the source has already been made, with its biases. Not much you can do or expect after this point. Also, who curates the curator? Again an age old problem with no real, long term working solution in sight. No, you should not expect some statistical model to hold your hand through vast internet, while giving up any form of critical thinking, reasoning, or I guess any cerebral process altogether. Ultimate laziness. Since we know how much money there is in diet fad business, its safe to say this above will find its non-tiny desperate crowd.