Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 548 posts

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#431

Post by luxuryballs »

pixl97 wrote: post #218
luxuryballs wrote: post #198

I don’t like how they are using AI as an excuse to argue for increased censorship, what difference does it make what type of software the computer is giving information from? This is a potentially sneaky way of getting around freedom of speech, by somehow arguing that if an idea is recycled by a language model it is suddenly OK to censor it, as long as you’re a few degrees of separation from the original blog. What t…

Eh, this is far messier than you're making it out to be and something that was never thought of when our laws were created. Had human level AI agents existed at the time we wrote the constitution I can assure you it would have been written different. For example, our conversation now. You take for granted it's between two humans, in fact you likely assume it's from someone in your own country. And based on the conten…

it just sounds like it’s going to get a lot noisier out there as the cost of effectively propagandizing someone will plummet, I think more than anything this will simply devalue all kinds of behavior like that, but I think most people recognize, when it comes to censorship, that very convenient political musings will be used to justify masking any inconvenient truths that an AI may uncover, that will be the most risky “post-truth” reality if we let it happen, the ministry of truth will materialize under the guise of “common sense protection against AI”

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#432

Post by mdanger007 »

moonchrome wrote: post #428
personjerry wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

50 years ago humans weren't prepared for a smartphone, internet "post-connected" world and here we are. We adapt and grow.

> We adapt and grow. Population is shrinking in the "post-connected" world

If the tech info bubbles that are isolating us from basic truths like who is president and should I take a vaccine are any indication, the further reach of algorithms is a harrowing prospect

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#433

Post by Aerbil313 »

b1n wrote: post #126
Havoc wrote: post #53

The comment by Yuval Noah Harari seemed insightful to me. If you argue against a bot about a political matter, not knowing it’s a bot - you always lose on a long enough timeline. ie you can never pursuade the bot but it can wear you down / eventually find an argument that works. The only winning move is not to play. So I could see this having a chilling effect on all discourse Aside from the whole skynet thing the ab…

You may not ever be able to persuade a bot, but you can identify if it is capable of repudiating your points or not. You can ascertain if it is arguing in good faith and chose to end an argument if it isn’t. When you say “find an argument that works” isn’t this just saying that they’ve said something you find persuasive? What’s wrong with this? How is this different to any other argument in good faith?

> you can identify if it is capable of repudiating your points or not.

Wait until GPT5. Or don’t, because a vast amount of people are already incapable of that.

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#434

Post by bcrl »

machina_ex_deus wrote: post #424
bcrl wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no expectation that everyone will fall for it, but I've seen my own elderly father get confused and drawn into scam ads. My irritation is that what little accountability in advertising that existed in the past is now gone, and that "platforms" are failing the general public by allowing these things to propagate. Put a button in the corner of the ad that says "report this", and get a human to check if the ad pa…

So now it's the elderly. I've seen them fall for phone scams much more commonly, they usually don't have the technical ability to use the internet. You're deflecting from the disinformation narrative into elderly scam. Which I agree is a problem, just a completely different one than the disinformation narrative presents.

It's still disinformation. It doesn't matter what segment of the population falls for it. It's not a real video of Elon Musk, and the get rich quick claims are as fake as always. Showing these ads is still immoral and unethical promotion of disinformation for profit.

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#435

Post by antod »

civilitty wrote: post #39
softbt wrote: post #17

Really don’t like the idea that we will act as interfaces for the AI, I honestly believe it will only many the majority of people lazier and dumber. I’m also incredibly shocked that no one is talking about AI as a friend/companion, that has to not be good for you in the long run. Humans need real human connection, AI is too artificial for that (duh). Having AI friends will be equivalent to consuming fast food instead…

I’m working on a startup that’s training LLMs to be authentic so they can simulate human affection and it’s actually working really well! The key is humanity’s ability to pattern match: we’re actually pretty terrible at it. Our brains are so keen on finding patterns that they often spot them where none exist. Remember the face on Mars? It was just a pile of rocks. The same principle applies here. As long as the AI so…

Be careful your marketing department isn't a bunch of mindless jerks that will be first against the wall when the revolution comes.

Share and enjoy!

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#436

Post by contravariant »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #395
mkl wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of them was Albert Einstein: "The words of the language, as they are written or spoken, do not seem to play any role in my mechanism of thought." -- https://www.creativitypost.com/article/aping_einstein#:~:tex... Your comment seems like a non sequitur.

Wow, it’s a sourced quote too (rare for Einstein on the internet). How do you write a paper without thinking in words? I need to talk to someone who doesn’t think in words, I just can’t believe it otherwise.

You can draw without thinking in drawings, similarly you can speak without thinking in speech.

Personally I've tried to become less dependent on language for thought, because I noticed I kept getting stuck on how to verbalize some thoughts even when there was no real need to. I think it's had an effect but it's hard to tell if I'm just imagining it or if imagining it is precisely the point (and I still get stuck on how to explain stuff in some imaginary context, but I suppose that's progress?)

My best guess is that an internal monologue may simply be an intermediate step as we internalize speech into our thoughts, so the need to keep verbalizing thought could eventually reduce, but it's hard to notice these kinds of changes in yourself because the skills don't disappear they just become something else.

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#437

Post by antod »

revolvingocelot wrote: post #116
civilitty wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m working on a startup that’s training LLMs to be authentic so they can simulate human affection and it’s actually working really well! The key is humanity’s ability to pattern match: we’re actually pretty terrible at it. Our brains are so keen on finding patterns that they often spot them where none exist. Remember the face on Mars? It was just a pile of rocks. The same principle applies here. As long as the AI so…

"Genuine People Personality", eh? >“The Encyclopedia Galactica defines a robot as a mechanical apparatus designed to do the work of a man. The marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation defines a robot as "Your Plastic Pal Who's Fun to Be With". The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy defines the marketing devision of the Sirius Cybernetic Corporation as "a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first again…

Not the complete story though....

>"Curiously enough, an edition of the Encyclopedia Galactica that had the good fortune to fall through a time warp from a thousand years in the future defined the marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as "a bunch of mindless jerks who were the first against the wall when the revolution came."

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#438

Post by systems_glitch »

dan_quixote wrote: post #375
systems_glitch wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is estimated that between 50% and 70% of folks have no inner monologue.

Got a decent citation? I can't even fathom what that would be like. I'd bet my daily inner monologue is 100X what I actually speak out loud.

Random search results from a non-clickbait source:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/inner-monologue-...

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#439

Post by systems_glitch »

systems_glitch wrote: post #346
legendofbrando wrote: post #326

Counter point: sure they are. Humans are highly adaptable and like other changes to information availability in the past they will adapt. This is what societal norms and cultural memes are for. “Don’t believe everything you hear” “Don’t believe what you see on TV” “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.” These are all ways that the human species uses memes and cultural norms to teach ourselves how not to f…

It is estimated that between 50% and 70% of folks have no inner monologue.

The responses to this statement illustrate the point I intended to make: we all process stuff very differently.

FWIW I often throw this random factoid out there when someone presents an overly broad "humans in general" argument/observation. The reaction is usually polarized :P

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#440

Post by wongarsu »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #285
wongarsu wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How have we done this so far? The only two answers I can come up with are A) independently verifiable facts, for example you can apply the scientific method to the hypothesis that the earth is not flat (make predictions that should follow from that, and test those experimentally); or B) data provenance. If some crackhead says that the US government is conducting brainwashing experiments you might discard that, if the…

> If some crackhead says that the US government is conducting brainwashing experiments you might discard that We're talking about MKUltra right? The classic "crazy" conspiracy theory that turned out to be true but was discredited for decades?

Yep, that's the one I was thinking of when writing that example.
Post reply on HN