51–60 of 452 posts
All this ChatGPT hysteria led me to have the following conversation with it. Probably hit some near future nail on its head. "Hello AI, please do today's tasks", the programmer will be on the level of the call center operator of today in terms of skills * Human: Explain to me the phenomenon of post-ChatGPT depression seen in a software developer * ChatGPT: [...] After using the ChatGPT tool, some developers may exper…
All this ChatGPT hysteria led me to have the following conversation with it. Probably hit some near future nail on its head. "Hello AI, please do today's tasks", the programmer will be on the level of the call center operator of today in terms of skills * Human: Explain to me the phenomenon of post-ChatGPT depression seen in a software developer * ChatGPT: [...] After using the ChatGPT tool, some developers may exper…
While the current speed of the AI research makes me quite uneasy, I cannot really dismiss what we are seeing as: >What we are witnessing is thus not "artificial creativity" but a simple "statistical mean of everything uploaded by humans on the internet which fits certain criteria". at least not more than I would my own brain. I don however fully expect a strong luddite-like backlash happening when this is going to be…
I almost never see that raised in these discussions. We have been so conditioned not to think about this subject.
We can blame the tech, each other, everything but the system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think the making of the original blade runner involved much in the way of modern AI. I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say.
AI creation tools make it easier to make stuff. This process will result in a lot of junk, but it will also result in some super creative people making art they otherwise couldn’t. The same process happened with filmmaking. Fifty or sixty years ago, it was too expensive for anyone other than large corporations. You could even say the same thing for writing itself; a thousand years ago, paper was too expensive for the…
In just the past couple of weeks, I've noticed lots of machine generated cooking recipes. They follow the typical SEO pandering blog format, where there's an unnecessary story about the author's trip somewhere or their child's school play being the inspiration for making this particular recipe, followed by the actual recipe details. The machine generated stories are even more pointless and meandering than what humans…
It is a real problem. The web will soon be full of AI generated bullshit. What might come back as useful tool? Authorship. People actually signing the content and putting their reputation on the line. It still exists obviously (journalism…) but it might need to be standardized and industrialized.
Another problem is AI training on AI generated content. This could lead to degradation of results. So perhaps to make everyone happy a new HTML tag indicating AI content would be useful?
People really love to make predictions about technologies way too early. It’s been a year or two, tops, since this stuff has gone mainstream. I very much doubt that the consumer ecosystem will remain the same while content undergoes an AI-powered paradigm shift. We will most likely see a growth of curated sites that help weed out the nonsense, as has been typical for most new developments. And on that note, I think t…
> These new tools are awesome if you’re a creator. you're typing "generate me an article about x" into gpt-3. who's the creator here?
I can think of two direct use cases where I would find it helpful:
- Creating a “précis” (concept from Neuromancer) video or article on a particular topic. For example, let’s say I want to learn about pre-20th century Indonesian art. Sure, I could Google and read some articles, but it would be vastly more enjoyable and efficient to just get a 5-minute video auto-generated on the topic.
- For creating content that I want to read but don’t necessarily have the time to write. I’d love to create a website that catalogs subcultures, for example, but I just don’t have the time to do the research and writing myself.
Both of these are dependent on the generated content being accurate, of course, but that seems like a temporary problem, not a flaw in the system itself.
According to the author, chatGPT is generating not "artificial creativity" but a simple "statistical mean of everything uploaded by humans on the internet which fits certain criteria". Isn't the post I'm typing here not also the product of my brain that's been trained by a couple of decades of sensory inputs and trained to produce outputs that fit certain criteria? What is the fundamental difference between fleshy ne…
No difference, you’re right - you’re just a large language model. Also, please write me a 5 page essay on the causes of the Industrial Revolution, in the style of a Shakespearean comedy. Please post your answer in the comments when you’re done.
Best way to get ahead these days is actually not be in AI ;)