AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
1–10 of 40 posts
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#2No shit Sherlock.
Until the end of the year we'll see both NVidia and the hyperscalers that rent their h100s see their revenues already shrinking, there's no way we can have that many companies doing LLMs and being useful.
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#3OK, so I'm neither a developer nor a content creator, and I can't think of anything useful a LLM could do for me. I tried a bit of chat and it was mildly amusing, but not for long. I certainly don't want one of them running my digital life for me. Isn't this just the zombie reincarnation of Clippy?
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#4OK, so I'm neither a developer nor a content creator, and I can't think of anything useful a LLM could do for me. I tried a bit of chat and it was mildly amusing, but not for long. I certainly don't want one of them running my digital life for me. Isn't this just the zombie reincarnation of Clippy?
It certainly is if that's how you use it. It makes a fine Clippy replacement. But if you want to compare the views of Robert Hughes the art critic with the views of Carl Jung the psychologist and have the AI tell what they might say in agreement about AI, then it's going to give you a different experience.
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#5OK, so I'm neither a developer nor a content creator, and I can't think of anything useful a LLM could do for me. I tried a bit of chat and it was mildly amusing, but not for long. I certainly don't want one of them running my digital life for me. Isn't this just the zombie reincarnation of Clippy?
Do you have a business where you employ people to do office work?
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#6OK, so I'm neither a developer nor a content creator, and I can't think of anything useful a LLM could do for me. I tried a bit of chat and it was mildly amusing, but not for long. I certainly don't want one of them running my digital life for me. Isn't this just the zombie reincarnation of Clippy?
It certainly is if that's how you use it. It makes a fine Clippy replacement. But if you want to compare the views of Robert Hughes the art critic with the views of Carl Jung the psychologist and have the AI tell what they might say in agreement about AI, then it's going to give you a different experience.
> But if you want to compare the views of Robert Hughes the art critic with the views of Carl Jung the psychologist and have the AI tell what they might say in agreement about AI, then it's going to give you a different experience.
In my experience, trying to ask it a comparably detailed question on a topic in which I am fairly knowledgeable (and therefore capable of judging the response) results in output that is rarely insightful and not infrequently factually incorrect.
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#7OK, so I'm neither a developer nor a content creator, and I can't think of anything useful a LLM could do for me. I tried a bit of chat and it was mildly amusing, but not for long. I certainly don't want one of them running my digital life for me. Isn't this just the zombie reincarnation of Clippy?
It certainly is if that's how you use it. It makes a fine Clippy replacement. But if you want to compare the views of Robert Hughes the art critic with the views of Carl Jung the psychologist and have the AI tell what they might say in agreement about AI, then it's going to give you a different experience.
But then this is just parroting, using statistical inferencing, what they "might" have said in their publications (and paraphrasing by countless academic papers, or even worse - since this is probably more likely - random qualified-or-not discourses and ramblings in internet forums), versus any sort of logical thinking, isn't it?
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
It certainly is if that's how you use it. It makes a fine Clippy replacement. But if you want to compare the views of Robert Hughes the art critic with the views of Carl Jung the psychologist and have the AI tell what they might say in agreement about AI, then it's going to give you a different experience.
> But if you want to compare the views of Robert Hughes the art critic with the views of Carl Jung the psychologist and have the AI tell what they might say in agreement about AI, then it's going to give you a different experience. In my experience, trying to ask it a comparably detailed question on a topic in which I am fairly knowledgeable (and therefore capable of judging the response) results in output that is ra…
It's hit or miss depending on the topic. Marc Andreesson recently made a video about the mental space of AI contains low quality sections, average sections and super-genius sections. Claude Opus seems very well trained on art criticism and psychology. But even if it's not well trained, sometimes putting two things together that way can yield suprising results. An AI like Claude Opus makes this kind of knowledge surfing pleasant and fluid which is what you want when thinking creatively. Even the mistakes can spark insights because you have to ask yourself why you know it's a mistake.
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
It certainly is if that's how you use it. It makes a fine Clippy replacement. But if you want to compare the views of Robert Hughes the art critic with the views of Carl Jung the psychologist and have the AI tell what they might say in agreement about AI, then it's going to give you a different experience.
But then this is just parroting, using statistical inferencing, what they "might" have said in their publications (and paraphrasing by countless academic papers, or even worse - since this is probably more likely - random qualified-or-not discourses and ramblings in internet forums), versus any sort of logical thinking, isn't it?
I doubt there are many acedemic articles or even internet forums comparing and contrasting the thinking of Robert Hughes and Carl Jung. A Google search of "Robert Hughes" "Carl Jung" turns up nothing except "Edward Robert Hughes" the painter. This ability of Opus to take a stab at it is what I find so fascinating. I agree, it's not a thinking reasoning being, but it's a pretty good mimic of one, which makes it more than a stochastic parrot to me. The natural language processing turns it to something relatable to a human as well. You might agree that a tool to do comparisons like this quickly would be useful for thinking:
Q: If art critic and Robert Hughes of "Shock of the New" and psychologist Carl Jung were to have a conversation about AI, what do you think they would they agree about it and where would they disagree?
Claude Opus: If art critic Robert Hughes and psychologist Carl Jung were to discuss AI, they might find some common ground, but they would also likely have some interesting points of disagreement based on their different perspectives and areas of expertise.
Potential areas of agreement:
Symbolic and archetypal representation: Jung's work on the collective unconscious and archetypes might resonate with Hughes' understanding of how art represents and communicates deep, shared human experiences. They might agree that AI-generated art could tap into these universal symbols and archetypes in powerful ways. The transformative power of technology: Both Hughes and Jung might recognize AI as a transformative technology with the potential to profoundly impact human consciousness and society, much like other significant technological developments throughout history.
The importance of creative expression: Jung's emphasis on the role of creativity in psychic health and individuation might align with Hughes' view of art as a vital form of human expression and a reflection of the human experience.
Potential areas of disagreement:
The nature of creativity: Jung might argue that true creativity stems from the unconscious mind and the integration of conscious and unconscious processes, while Hughes might place more emphasis on the role of conscious artistic intention and the influence of cultural and historical contexts on creative expression.
The value of AI-generated art: Hughes, as an art critic, might be more skeptical of the artistic merit of AI-generated art, seeing it as lacking the depth, originality, and emotional resonance of human-created art. Jung, on the other hand, might be more open to the psychological and symbolic significance of AI-generated art, regardless of its origins.
The impact on the human psyche: Jung might express concern about the potential negative impact of AI on the human psyche, such as the risk of over-reliance on technology leading to a disconnection from the unconscious mind and a loss of individuality. Hughes, while acknowledging the potential downsides, might be more focused on the ways in which AI could expand the boundaries of artistic expression and human perception.
The role of the individual artist: Hughes might emphasize the importance of the individual artist's vision, skill, and creativity in the creation of meaningful art, while Jung might place more emphasis on the collective and universal aspects of artistic expression.
Ultimately, a dialogue between Hughes and Jung on AI would likely be a rich and complex one, reflecting the multifaceted nature of the topic and the unique perspectives that each thinker would bring to the conversation.
Re: AI products like ChatGPT much hyped but not much used, study says
#10From what I can tell, the biggest proponents of AI in everything are the investors anticipating that people will want AI in everything.
I actually enjoy using LLM chat interfaces like ChatGPT directly, and I do benefit from Copilot in VS Code. I just treat it as a fallible entity just like I would a person. I use it as a sounding board or a place to jump-start ideas.
What I never use is anything resembling a product-specific AI interface within apps like Notion or Google Docs. I actively avoid AI writing assistants because I feel like authenticity is more detectable than some people realize.