[deleted]
I Received an AI Email
151–160 of 597 posts
Re: I Received an AI Email
#152[deleted]
Re: I Received an AI Email
#153Anti AI art people remind me of anti AI marketing people from hackernews. Guys, it’s a tool like any other.
> Anti AI art people remind me of anti AI marketing people from hackernews.
... what an incredibly odd thing to say.
But really, I've noticed that thought-ending cliches like this one are popping up as defensive reactions around LLMs more and more. This particular thought-ender displays the most common theme - it dismisses all skepticism as being driven by some amorphous "anti-AI" demographic, presumably allowing the author to dismiss any concerns and thereby preventing any critical thought from occurring.
Kind of feels like "nocoiner" and "have fun being poor", v2 ...
Re: I Received an AI Email
#154From the linked article from this blogpost:
> There's also the question of ethical considerations around using AI for mass personalized outreach. While my experiment yielded positive results, with recipients appreciating the personalized touch, there's a potential slippery slope.
Unbelievable... I'm not a philosopher, but in my understanding, being ethical doesn't mean walking the line just fine so as people don't call you out on your bullshit.
The ethics of an action is of consideration both BEFORE and after executing it, and on the merit of the action itself!
Re: I Received an AI Email
#155Sounds like https://xkcd.com/810/
Re: I Received an AI Email
#156If John Doe crafts a message himself and sends it to 100000 recipients, or if he uses ChatGPT to generate a message and then send it to 100000 recipients, what’s the difference? Both are unsolicited emails, i.e. spam. I feel confident that Gmail’s spam filter will be able to handle this quite well. I’m betting that the introduction of LLMs will not change the fundamentals of spam-fighting. https://paulgraham.com/spam…
> what’s the difference?
The key difference here is personalization.
Traditionally, if a message was personalized it fell under 'cold outreach' and users were more likely to interact and play along. Just like what happened with the author (the same applies for everyone).
It's like the difference between receiving a flyer vs being contacted by a sales representative. Even if it's they advertise the same product, the perception is different, the results are different.
If you're mean the difference from a pure technical spam detection perspective, I'm not familiar, but would love to read more about the subject and the state of the art techniques if anyone has some resources to recommend.
Re: I Received an AI Email
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
What incentive do they have to make Ozempic resistant food? Ozempic resistance seems like an odd thing to optimize for. Or are you suggesting it will happen accidentally?
Ozempic reduces appetite, right? So food producers cannot be happy about it.
I love the idea of the comic villainy of someone who deliberately chooses to organize a team to find ways to circumvent Ozempic in order to keep their buyers unhealthy and addicted. Could such a schemer have an internal monologue, and what would it consist of? What do they see when they look into a mirror? Their experience of reality must be utterly fascinating and alien.
Re: I Received an AI Email
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Getting peed at a couple times a day isn't a problem if the pee-ees miss 99% od the time, right? Small acts of malice are still acts of malice. Not everyone wants to live in a caveat emptor , dog-eats-dog society.
Having tried to start a business and known other business owners, I will die on this hill: sales and marketing are not "acts of malice". Without salespeople we wouldn't live in the world we lived today. This is like the irrational hate some developers have for recruiters, despite them finding jobs for many people that they otherwise would never have known about.
Marketing is fundamentally aimed at changing people's opinions. This can be done
1. covertly (why do you need to do it covertly? Would people mind if they knew? Doesn't that indicate you're doing them a disservice?)
2. overtly, against people's will. (Again, doesn't that indicate you're doing them a disservice?)
3. overtly, with their consent (express or assumed). How often have you seen this happen?
The "indicates" vs "shows" distinction above deals with the edge case of "interacting with covert/unwanted marketing is actually good for them, even if they don't know it". I dare you to make that argument...
Re: I Received an AI Email
#159Is email doomed?
Re: I Received an AI Email
#160But that email is spam, no matter if automatically or manually generated.
How it was written is not relevant. Off to the trash it goes.