4 ms·
To all the AI apologists here I'd like to submit a simple scenario to you and hear your answer: you use AI to create a keynote speech on a topic you needed to u
by pluc 11mo ago
To all the AI apologists here I'd like to submit a simple scenario to you and hear your answer: you use AI to create a keynote speech on a topic you needed to use AI to write. At the end of your speech, people ask you questions about the contents of your speech. What do you say?
This is the same.
- genewitch 11mo ago"hey bixby, answer the next question you hear"
- j4coh 11mo ago"Beats me. AI decided to do so and I didn't question it."
- thisisit 11mo ago"I lack funding to answer. Pay me and I'll ask AI to answer your question."
- bilekas 11mo ago"The AI has a complete understanding of your question, prove me wrong"
- laterium 11mo agoWhat have politicians been doing forever?
- wiml 11mo agoDepends on the politician, yes? Some politicians will eagerly go into any level of detail on policy that you let them. Some seem to have no idea where their opinions come from.
- collingreen 11mo agoAnd are we fans of that approach or does it feel disingenuous and, in politicians cases, dangerously corrupt?
- silverlake 11mo agoHi, AI apologist here. This scenario is a problem with or without AI. You can’t drop a 13k line PR you don’t understand without prior discussion. There are many ways to use AI. Your scenario (keynote speech) is a bad way to use it. Instead, a PR where you understand every line, whether you or an AI wrote it, should be fine. It would be indistinguishable from human generated code. AI is a tool like any other. I hire a carpenter who knows how to build furniture. Whether he uses a Japanese pullsaw or a CNC machine is irrelevant to me.
- pluc 11mo agoThat's a fair answer. How do you stop people from doing it though? How do you stop it from becoming every lazy person's first reflex instead of every smart person's third?
- silverlake 11mo agoI don’t know. But at least you’ve identified the real problem: lazy people generating trash code. AI isn’t bad, people are.
- zbentley 11mo agoWe have historically intervened socially (via state regulation, taboo, or censure) in areas where the likelihood of misbehavior was high or the result of misbehavior was severe enough. For example: nuclear material possession or refinement; slavery; consumer-available systemic antibiotics; ozone-damaging coolants; dowries. Proscriptions on those are imperfect and inconsistent worldwide, but still prevalent. Each of them is a thing which benefited many people but whose practice enabled massive harm due to human failures (like laziness).
- liamness 11mo agoI suppose the issue is that it's a multiplier for bad actors. It has become so much easier to generate plausible-looking code (or any number of things that would've previously required a knowledgeable human to make something that at least passes the sniff test, let's say legal documents as another example) and just overwhelm the limited bandwidth of good actors.