81–90 of 156 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes because Poe’s Law has never been more true than the current era. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
How wow, it even has a name and a wikipedia article... Guess that makes it official then. We are all automatons pretending to be flesh :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question : does it need to be said ? It's like the /s sign. Can some people not, for themselves, realize that this text is meant as a more or less a joke ? And before you ask, yeah, I am aware some of the people are on the spectrum, but still... Is humor that hard to grasp on the internet ?
When it's this poorly executed, yes it needs to be said. I was going back and forth on whether it was for far longer than I should have been.
Please consider that the fault here might be in you, not the text.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question : does it need to be said ? It's like the /s sign. Can some people not, for themselves, realize that this text is meant as a more or less a joke ? And before you ask, yeah, I am aware some of the people are on the spectrum, but still... Is humor that hard to grasp on the internet ?
> Is humor that hard to grasp on the internet ? Yes. Humor is very hard to grasp via text, especially sarcastic humor, because in person we use voice and body language to signal that something is meant as a joke.
The problem we face is that a lot of people are in deep denial about their level of functional literacy.
The Chalk Talk was not invented after the IBM System/360. This entire article is clearly a joke.
This is satire.
Honest question : does it need to be said ? It's like the /s sign. Can some people not, for themselves, realize that this text is meant as a more or less a joke ? And before you ask, yeah, I am aware some of the people are on the spectrum, but still... Is humor that hard to grasp on the internet ?
This is satire.
Honest question : does it need to be said ? It's like the /s sign. Can some people not, for themselves, realize that this text is meant as a more or less a joke ? And before you ask, yeah, I am aware some of the people are on the spectrum, but still... Is humor that hard to grasp on the internet ?
2) I think that the best satire is fair, and should read to the targets as real commentary. When someone takes your satire seriously, it means that you have successfully commented on reality. Is that inverse Poe's Law?
Otherwise you're just putting words in your enemies' mouths that they would not ever say. I think people do this because they don't have the strength of their own convictions, and wouldn't be able to stand people not getting their joke (and worse, confusing them for extreme believers in something that they disdain.)
To them I would suggest that one doesn't try to make arguments through satire, one rather demonstrate arguments through satire. If you need to make your argument with satire, you actually don't have an argument. Satire without a solid underpinning argument is just propaganda.
Calling it "Discrimination" is obviously absurd but if the process produces useful results, one ought to seriously consider whether it might be worth switching. I understand we have always conventionally transported goods by horse. Yes, this employee knows nothing about horses, and in fact is rather spooked by them, but we've checked! Their claim to be able to transport goods faster, without a horse, somehow seems to…
I don't think the argument is necessarily against the use of the tools entirely. My interpretation is that it's against delegating to them all understanding. Humans can only usefully steer LLMs if they have some understanding or context the LLMs do not.
It’s a joke and all but also not really? You might have to go do a chalk talk at some point, and that is basically the only part of this article that is actually not real. The rest (about how everyone in academia is prompting everything) is absolutely VERY real. The word around all the scientific communities which I’m in contact with (to be honest, not so many) is basically “oh, there is no way to stop it, so we’ll e…
The "not really" aspect is so significant that it's barely a joke. It's more serious and thought provoking than a simple joke. I guess that's how good satire works. This in particular I found quite interesting: "My research is a collaboration between me and several large language models. We are co-investigators. When you ask me to explain my research without ChatGPT, you are asking me to speak on behalf of a collabor…
I’m old enough to remember when calculators were banned from classrooms, for almost the exact same reasons that people are giving against AI.
It’s really only a matter of time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Honest question : does it need to be said ? Yes. There are literally people who believe any thinking done without AI is Luddite and subpar. These are not, in my experience, people who have done any great thinking in their lives. They do tend to tweet a lot.
Why would you bother telling them it’s satire?