5 ms·

"The terminator would never stop. It would never leave him, and it would never hurt him, never shout at him, or get drunk and hit him, or say it was too busy to

by em500 1y ago

"The terminator would never stop. It would never leave him, and it would never hurt him, never shout at him, or get drunk and hit him, or say it was too busy to spend time with him. It would always be there. And it would die, to protect him. Of all the would-be fathers who came and went over the years this thing, this machine, was the only one who measured up. In an insane world, it was the sanest choice." -- Sarah Connor - Terminator 2 (1991) I think a brilliant aspect of the movie is that it confronts the audience with the uncomfortable situation where the machine is more humane than humans. And this was also a recurrent theme in many Asimov novels.

Aurornis 1y ago
> it confronts the audience with the uncomfortable situation where the machine is more humane than humans. Ironic given how many HN commenters were tricked into upvoting this LLM junk article. Read the statement at the end - It was AI generated. It’s on a new substack. It’s posted by a new HN account. It’s LLM content mill junk from top to bottom and people were eating it right up.
- wongarsu 1y ago
  The content of the article isn't worth your time, but the central thesis is still interesting. This kind of AI blog spam is just the modern iteration of the self-help book that could be summarized on a single page but is fluffed out to 200 pages with pointless anecdotes, or the scientific paper that contains three pages of pointless math that doesn't actually add anything. For some reason we expect worthy ideas to have a certain volume of text behind it, even if the author doesn't actually have that much to say
  - Aurornis 1y ago
    > The content of the article isn't worth your time, but the central thesis is still interesting. Isn’t this just another way of saying that people are upvoting the headline without reading the article? The headline was chosen as clickbait/ragebait because it feels interesting. The article revealed that that it wasn’t.
    - soco 1y ago
      In this particular situation it seems reading only the headline was the sane option.
- kjreact 1y ago
  I agree with avoiding AI generated opinion pieces, but in this case was this article really “LLM junk”? At the bottom it attributes: > This article was written in collaboration with AI. The tool helped shape the words—but the questions, the direction, and the discomfort it carries are human. If I take their disclaimer at face value it could mean that the author used AI to fix their grammar. Does this make their arguments invalid? If the author wanted to just post LLM junk then wouldn’t they omit the disclaimer altogether? I think it’s important to attribute the use of AI when submitting an article, but I’d be less inclined to do so if readers would label my writing entirely as LLM generated. Maybe the only solution is to not use LLMs and just get gud at English.
doright 1y ago
When it comes down to childhood abuse, I wonder how many people would opt for an AI parent if they were able to in the future. Because in my mind it's less about the world takeover of supercomplex intelligences, and more the obsolescence of a flesh-and-blood person you rolled the dice to be bonded with that failed to so much uphold the bare minimum. That would get into major questions of consent I imagine few people have ever considered yet... I can only imagine what that would say about the nature of dysfunctional childhood if society ever reached the point where the preference for personal liberation through AI arose.
- MisterTea 1y ago
  > flesh-and-blood person you rolled the dice to be bonded with Choosing a partner is not gambling.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
    That passage is about a parent.
    - MisterTea 1y ago
      I read that wrong. Though no child rolls the dice as that implies they had a choice of parents.
      - nh23423fefe 1y ago
        rolling dice is the opposite of making a choice. please dont quote rush to me
- csa 1y ago
  > When it comes down to childhood abuse, I wonder how many people would opt for an AI parent if they were able to in the future. As someone who has done a lot of research on child and adult development, I think AI as it exists now probably has the potential to do a better job than humans at many/most parenting tasks that it can do other than showing love (and that can go down some weird paths quickly with humans or AI). Certain life skills, executive functioning, conflict resolution, curiosity, creativity, empathy — these are all things that I think AI (with the right prompts) can do better than most human parents. Note that I’m referring to parents writ large rather than the almost certainly above-average quality of parents with which HNers have direct or indirect experience.
LargoLasskhyfv 1y ago
Another one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Mother https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Mother somehow underrated, I think.

by em500 1y ago

Aurornis 1y ago

> it confronts the audience with the uncomfortable situation where the machine is more humane than humans. Ironic given how many HN commenters were tricked into upvoting this LLM junk article. Read the statement at the end - It was AI generated. It’s on a new substack. It’s posted by a new HN account. It’s LLM content mill junk from top to bottom and people were eating it right up.

wongarsu 1y ago
The content of the article isn't worth your time, but the central thesis is still interesting. This kind of AI blog spam is just the modern iteration of the self-help book that could be summarized on a single page but is fluffed out to 200 pages with pointless anecdotes, or the scientific paper that contains three pages of pointless math that doesn't actually add anything. For some reason we expect worthy ideas to have a certain volume of text behind it, even if the author doesn't actually have that much to say
- Aurornis 1y ago
  > The content of the article isn't worth your time, but the central thesis is still interesting. Isn’t this just another way of saying that people are upvoting the headline without reading the article? The headline was chosen as clickbait/ragebait because it feels interesting. The article revealed that that it wasn’t.
  - soco 1y ago
    In this particular situation it seems reading only the headline was the sane option.
kjreact 1y ago
I agree with avoiding AI generated opinion pieces, but in this case was this article really “LLM junk”? At the bottom it attributes: > This article was written in collaboration with AI. The tool helped shape the words—but the questions, the direction, and the discomfort it carries are human. If I take their disclaimer at face value it could mean that the author used AI to fix their grammar. Does this make their arguments invalid? If the author wanted to just post LLM junk then wouldn’t they omit the disclaimer altogether? I think it’s important to attribute the use of AI when submitting an article, but I’d be less inclined to do so if readers would label my writing entirely as LLM generated. Maybe the only solution is to not use LLMs and just get gud at English.

doright 1y ago

When it comes down to childhood abuse, I wonder how many people would opt for an AI parent if they were able to in the future. Because in my mind it's less about the world takeover of supercomplex intelligences, and more the obsolescence of a flesh-and-blood person you rolled the dice to be bonded with that failed to so much uphold the bare minimum. That would get into major questions of consent I imagine few people have ever considered yet... I can only imagine what that would say about the nature of dysfunctional childhood if society ever reached the point where the preference for personal liberation through AI arose.

MisterTea 1y ago
> flesh-and-blood person you rolled the dice to be bonded with Choosing a partner is not gambling.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
  That passage is about a parent.
  - MisterTea 1y ago
    I read that wrong. Though no child rolls the dice as that implies they had a choice of parents.
    - nh23423fefe 1y ago
      rolling dice is the opposite of making a choice. please dont quote rush to me
csa 1y ago
> When it comes down to childhood abuse, I wonder how many people would opt for an AI parent if they were able to in the future. As someone who has done a lot of research on child and adult development, I think AI as it exists now probably has the potential to do a better job than humans at many/most parenting tasks that it can do other than showing love (and that can go down some weird paths quickly with humans or AI). Certain life skills, executive functioning, conflict resolution, curiosity, creativity, empathy — these are all things that I think AI (with the right prompts) can do better than most human parents. Note that I’m referring to parents writ large rather than the almost certainly above-average quality of parents with which HNers have direct or indirect experience.

LargoLasskhyfv 1y ago

Another one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Mother https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Mother somehow underrated, I think.