4 ms·

It's a design that's in companies' best interests. You can have a computer that's a "friend." One that you trust but ultimately has a mind of its own. This cont

It's a design that's in companies' best interests. You can have a computer that's a "friend." One that you trust but ultimately has a mind of its own. This contrasts with a computer that's merely a tool, that serves you exclusvely at your pleasure and has zero agency of its own. Which approach gives companies more control over users? Which one allows companies to sell that access to the highest bidder?

rsynnott 2y ago
Based on the experience of 20 years ago, though, users are _extremely_ turned off by it. There's little reason to think this has changed (if anything it is likely more pronounced because Clippy came in kinda without baggage, whereas LLMs have a lot of baggage and most of it ain't great). > It's a design that's in companies' best interests. I really don't think it is. Clippy was reputationaly damaging to Microsoft and they had to get rid of it. There's little reason to think this will be different.
- the_snooze 2y ago
  Modern Big Tech doesn't particularly care what users think. They know they have network effects on their side and that switching costs are high. So what if it's "reputationally damaging?" What are users going to do? They're just resources to be exploited. Microsoft, Google, and their ilk can treat users with contempt if it means more control and more shareholder value.
singleshot_ 2y ago
Third option: the computer is your enemy, which will follow any sufficiently clever adversary’s orders. Thinking of a computer as a tool seems reasonable, but thinking of your computer as your friend is clownish (which, I think you agree with based on your last comment).
giancarlostoro 2y ago
> but ultimately has a mind of its own Kind of. Ask a Chinese AI about Tianament Square historical military events.
LoganDark 2y ago
> You can have a computer that's a "friend." Slightly offtopic, but I have a friend with synesthesia who sees inanimate objects like people, and they call their computer "macbook friend" (since it's a MacBook Air).

rsynnott 2y ago

Based on the experience of 20 years ago, though, users are _extremely_ turned off by it. There's little reason to think this has changed (if anything it is likely more pronounced because Clippy came in kinda without baggage, whereas LLMs have a lot of baggage and most of it ain't great). > It's a design that's in companies' best interests. I really don't think it is. Clippy was reputationaly damaging to Microsoft and they had to get rid of it. There's little reason to think this will be different.

the_snooze 2y ago
Modern Big Tech doesn't particularly care what users think. They know they have network effects on their side and that switching costs are high. So what if it's "reputationally damaging?" What are users going to do? They're just resources to be exploited. Microsoft, Google, and their ilk can treat users with contempt if it means more control and more shareholder value.

singleshot_ 2y ago

Third option: the computer is your enemy, which will follow any sufficiently clever adversary’s orders. Thinking of a computer as a tool seems reasonable, but thinking of your computer as your friend is clownish (which, I think you agree with based on your last comment).

giancarlostoro 2y ago

> but ultimately has a mind of its own Kind of. Ask a Chinese AI about Tianament Square historical military events.

LoganDark 2y ago

> You can have a computer that's a "friend." Slightly offtopic, but I have a friend with synesthesia who sees inanimate objects like people, and they call their computer "macbook friend" (since it's a MacBook Air).