• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Some of the AI fears felt outlandish. Maybe not so much now.

the resulting programs need to be tested and debugged,
Yes. The problem I see is with the laziness of the users of AI.
My limited experience is mostly with the slop on youtube.
A vid of something technical, historical or archeological will have inaccurate photos of objects that change size or shape every few seconds. Like the too many fingers problem. A vid about food pronounced rib-eye stake, RY-BY, 5 times. Another pronounced GPS as GPs, like a plural of GP.
A human would not make those mistakes. More to my point... A human would not let those mistakes pass.
The people who choose to use AI are just fucking lazy.
If you don't have a photo of something, don't fake it, that cheats your viewer. If you use an AI to write or narrate, PROOFREAD and listen to it before releasing it.
The ones I hate are the AI captioning on YouTube videoes where the spelling is appalling and words that are somewhat homophonic will be spelt differently when they are captioned. Sometimes correctly.

Need to learn how to turn off reliably the captioning on Youtube
 
the resulting programs need to be tested and debugged,
Yes. The problem I see is with the laziness of the users of AI.
My limited experience is mostly with the slop on youtube.
A vid of something technical, historical or archeological will have inaccurate photos of objects that change size or shape every few seconds. Like the too many fingers problem. A vid about food pronounced rib-eye stake, RY-BY, 5 times. Another pronounced GPS as GPs, like a plural of GP.
A human would not make those mistakes. More to my point... A human would not let those mistakes pass.
The people who choose to use AI are just fucking lazy.
If you don't have a photo of something, don't fake it, that cheats your viewer. If you use an AI to write or narrate, PROOFREAD and listen to it before releasing it.
Depends on the situation. So long as the AI artifacts do not mess with the understanding it can be useful anyway--if the purpose is the scene as a whole an imperfect model of an object in it is annoying but I won't automatically reject it for that.
When I programmed, I often relied on open source libraries of code to model components of the program I was working on. It is stupid to try to invent everything out of whole cloth. I see nothing wrong with using AI as a more convenient source of such information on how to accomplish certain tasks. So-called AI definitely has a use in that sense. It is not really going to replace programmers, but there are always going to be those who see it more as a way to reduce the cost of labor than to make it more productive by freeing employees up to accomplish other tasks that they have the skills for and the AI programs do not. Firing intelligent people and replacing them with artificial stupidity is natural human stupidity.
From what I've seen you'll spend as much time checking the AI's work as just doing it. Useful for search, not otherwise.

And I mistakenly had CoPilot turned on for a little while instead of the native code guesser. Got everything wrong. 100% would not compile.
 
And I mistakenly had CoPilot turned on for a little while instead of the native code guesser. Got everything wrong. 100% would not compile.
I've had some really amusing experiences with CoPilot when I've asked it to identify buildings and works of art that I've taken pictures of on recent trips. Usually, it correctly identifies them , but there are times when it gets the identity and location completely wrong. For example, it will tell me that a building I took a photo of in Brazil was actually in Germany. Recently, it identified a tower in a German fortification as part of the Great Wall of China. When I tried to correct its error, it pushed back, giving me lists of reasons why I was mistaken, even after I input the information that I myself took the picture in the country I said it was in. I can get it to eventually admit that it had made such an error, but it is surreal to have an argument with a simulated person. AI engineers can tweak these programs to improve their accuracy, but fixing a problem with some subject matter might introduce anomalous behavior with regard to other subject matter. It is like trying to weigh frogs. They won't all sit still on the scale. It is laughable to think that chatbots can be scaled up to real consciousness or intelligence. Their only connection to reality is through patterns of text and pixels that real intelligent agents actually create.
 

That's as far as I got before the paywall slammed on me. Sorry.
Just more PR bullshit. Same as "our models are soooo dangerous we can't control them".



At this point I'm just waiting for the bubble to pop and for the mania to end.

We'll find out if the marginal productivity gains are worth the expense, but more importantly, the C-suite will shut the fuck up about wedging LLMs into every aspect of our jobs.
 

That's as far as I got before the paywall slammed on me. Sorry.
Just more PR bullshit. Same as "our models are soooo dangerous we can't control them".



At this point I'm just waiting for the bubble to pop and for the mania to end.

We'll find out if the marginal productivity gains are worth the expense, but more importantly, the C-suite will shut the fuck up about wedging LLMs into every aspect of our jobs.
Their chatbots are definitely not conscious, but I think one could say that Anthropic is very conscious of how precarious their future profitability is. I think that the Chinese are pulling ahead of the US precisely because their investments in technology have had to depend on less expensive means of achieving the same results with low-cost open weight models.

See, for example:

Breakthroughs in Chinese AI models threaten U.S. lead in tech race​

 
We'll find out if the marginal productivity gains are worth the expense
I can tell you now that they are not, and it's not even close. The gains fall many orders of magnitude short of the expense already incurred, and expenditure is still accelerating, as the gains stagnate, and the techbros become ever more frantic in their absurd claims of (our new AI overlords will turn us all into) jam tomorrow.
 
Back
Top Bottom