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

501–510 of 548 posts

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

#501

Post by synetic »

vba616 wrote: post #484
synetic wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A child can’t prove 1+1 = 2 because a child doesn’t know enough mathematics to prove it. Doesn’t even understand the basics of mathematical logic or set theory. You know so little about what it means to prove 1+1=2 that you think proving this is easy. Your grasp on the limits of your mathematical knowledge is greatly lacking. There are no right questions, only right answers. A point that does not pertain to what I sa…

>A person not trained in virology or microbiology is absolutely unqualified to discern the difference between good information and bad information on the topic of vaccines. It seems hard to argue with that...but what exactly is the meaning of saying people are "absolutely unqualified" to do something which they in fact do constantly and which there is no obvious alternative in order for society to function? If we acc…

It seems hard to argue with that...but what exactly is the meaning of saying people are "absolutely unqualified" to do something which they in fact do constantly and which there is no obvious alternative in order for society to function?

In my opinion the answer is this. Roughly speaking, in general: Overwhelming expert consensus opinion on a topic has a much higher chance of being correct than any contrary belief I have based off of “research” that I do. The overwhelming expert consensus might very well be wrong but it’s clear that they are way more likely to be right than I am.

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

#502

Post by junon »

johnchristopher wrote: post #492
bazeblackwood wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so by your logic, it's the "real" entities which will inevitably experience pain, suffering, and death; meanwhile I will reincarnate eternally as part of the program's grand design, simply because my thoughts are abstract instead of an auditory hallucination? ever consider maybe your "internal dialogue" is actually the instructions the programmers have to keep ramming in your face so you actually complete your quests…

Sweet Jesus, how sensitive are the NPCs today... edit: they are downvoting ! they are getting sentient !

HN just isn't really the most receptive crowd when it comes to playfulness. I wouldn't take it personally.

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

#503

Post by legendofbrando »

synetic wrote: post #498
forgetfreeman wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no evidence I'm aware of that supports the notion that we are capable, as a species, of weathering the social and psychological effects of the modern communications era and a growing body of evidence that suggest we aren't. Given human psychology around in-group dynamics it seems likely we never will be on anything other than evolutionary time scales.

Indeed. We did not evolve to adequately deal with this new reality.

Anything you think we could do to help people deal with it or in your view is this settled?

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

#504

Post by synetic »

legendofbrando wrote: post #503
synetic wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. We did not evolve to adequately deal with this new reality.

Anything you think we could do to help people deal with it or in your view is this settled?

I have no idea. As AI generated content becomes more prevalent and as bots become a huge percentage of online comments I hope it will lead to people leaving the internet. For the most part I think the dead internet theory will become a reality. I hope humans will develop coping mechanisms.

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

#505

Post by jerf »

treis wrote: post #320
jerf wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think about it as a one-off amusement it's no big deal. This is how most people are evaluating it. But consider iterating such an interaction over the course of, say, 25 years, and comparing the person who was interacting with humans versus the one who interacted with LLMs, and any halfway sensible model of a human will show you what's dangerous about that. Yeah, the former may well have some more bumps and br…

I think a lot of this is based on circular reasoning. The people who interact with other humans will have relationships with those humans. And those relationships are the evidence that they're way ahead. I do think there is higher maximum with other people. But relationships are hard. They take work and there's a decent chance you invest that work in the wrong people. I can see a life with primarily AI social interac…

"I think a lot of this is based on circular reasoning."

No. Actually it's based on information theory, and probably a better model of what interacting with an LLM would look like a year or five later than the one you are operating on.

Here's a little hint: It has total amnesia. LLMs by their nature scale only so far, and while they may scale larger than ChatGPT, they aren't going to be scaling for an entire lifetime of interaction. (That's going to take another AI technology.)

Ever interacted with someone with advanced dementia but otherwise functioning faculties for any period of time? (I suppose they could well make good therapists too.)

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

#506

Post by jerf »

falcor84 wrote: post #406
treis wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of this is based on circular reasoning. The people who interact with other humans will have relationships with those humans. And those relationships are the evidence that they're way ahead. I do think there is higher maximum with other people. But relationships are hard. They take work and there's a decent chance you invest that work in the wrong people. I can see a life with primarily AI social interac…

Absolutely agreed. For many individuals “hell is other people”.

This is a false dichotomy, and one that is actually dangerous to you if you believe it. Your choices are not "deal with the bad people in your life" or "retreat into solely interacting with LLMs".

If you have the latter option, you also have "leave the bad people behind" as an option because it is made of the things you need in order to "retreat solely into interacting with LLMs" and is in fact simpler.

Cynicism and casting learned helplessness as a virtue are not the solution.

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

#507

Post by SirMaster »

brandall10 wrote: post #493
SirMaster wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that seem to be going with for example transgenderism or various sexualities? It just seems like a double standard and that there are a lot of problems with this line of thought to me. I have trouble understanding it.

Keep in mind I did say the self help industry - this isn’t a clinically mandated thing, it’s something people seek out themselves. There is an innate desire to improve. Think about something really benign that almost everyone can agree on, like Toastmasters. Perhaps in a few years w/ a VR headset you can improve public speaking in front of a virtual crowd if you’re so shy that doing it in front of a large group of st…

If you keep it to things that basic yeah that makes sense.

My mind kept going over the question of how does the AI truly determine what the majority consensus is and is that really good or fair to make everyone conform to.

Like where do you draw the lines is what kept going around in my head.

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

#508

Post by tacocataco »

resolutebat wrote: post #55
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…

A lot of jobs are already human interfaces for computers. Ever talked or messages with a call center? They're following scripts and trying to pattern match your problem with what they have to work with manually, AI is just going to 10x this for both good and bad. Mostly bad, I suspect, because good luck getting an AI to escalate to a supervisor.

The bad user experience calling these call centers is a cost saving measure. Yes a large percentage will suffer your customer service lines, but it's all about that small percentage that gives up. Huge cost savings.

You can sew this exact same scenario play out by interacting with the "safety net". Long arduous processes meant to weed out some small percentage of callers/applicants.

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

#509

Post by red-iron-pine »

mandmandam wrote: post #207
civilized wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of pushy humans who are prepared to talk you into submission. Check out your local Scientology or Lyndon LaRouche movement office. Would you talk interminably with a pushy human? How is the AI any different?

The differences that jump out at me are in cost, scale and accountability. It's work recruiting people to your cause. It's expensive, and takes time and attention and resources. People have consciences that might flare up, they have loose lips, they need training and guidance and oversight. Letting a bot loose for your cause costs pennies . It can be updated with a few clicks. You can reverse course or fine tune with…

it's not just cheaper, its eminently more reactive.

your human recruiter is going to have their own biases, could be tired, may not know how to deal with personality X or Y, they may not learn.

the bots can track how they do by upvote, react quickly, won't get tired or annoyed, and can use existing data to filter and target those who are extremely vulnerable.

hell, with real-time analysis by data mining companies (cough cough FB, reddit) they could even figure out if/when a normally stable-ish person is in crisis or has a bad week, and hit them at their most susceptible. 99% of the year they might be able to see through the BS, but this week things are hard and what they're seeing in their feed just feels right, for once...

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

#510

Post by tacocataco »

BizarreByte wrote: post #175
hospitalJail wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a similar note, I'll take the AI medical advice any day of the week. Had a buddy describe a difficult morning and I opened chatGPT to diagnose, it suggested he had a stroke. My buddy was not going to the hospital because its so expensive, but since chatGPT said it was a stroke, and his symptoms matched the stroke, he went to the hospital. He had a stroke. On a similar note, I am stable and don't need therapy, but…

> I was never going to pay for therapy, this gave me some insight and actually made me interested in therapy. ChatGPT could never be as bad as most human therapists, at least if it tells lies they're believable and it won't try to insult, belittle, or infantalize you. Medical usage is perhaps the single most interesting use of ChatGPT to me, the problem will be solving the liability issue should it get something wron…

WebMD seems to get by okay in regards to liability.
Post reply on HN