Yeah, I’d believe it. Outside of anti-AI circlejerks people like AI, especially ones like ChatGPT, and especially if it is available right at their fingertips. It’s quickly becoming a part of everyday life and processes.
The anti-AI people need to start accepting that today and every day after it is going be the day that AI plays the smallest part in humanity’s future. The genie is out of the bottle and it’s never going back in. The sooner they can accept that and let go of the hate and see it for what it is - a useful tool to help you - the better and less angry their lives will be.
How useful is it really? I constantly hear about it being wrong and I’m not so stupid that I can’t handle a search through Wikipedia on my own.
Why should accept this thing that is of such little benefit to my life? Why should I accept this thing that is constantly wrong? Why should I accept this thing that just allows uncreative and insecure people to fill the internet full of garbage?
If you need AI as it is to help you do things then I pity you greatly.
Ok but we know that it’s very often wrong and tries too hard to make you feel good instead of actually giving correct answers. It makes up reasons for made-up sayings, often struggles with math, and has a whole host of other issues while acting fully confident in its infallibility. We have several studies that seem to show that its use is having a negative affect on ohr critical thinking skills as well. After all that it doesn’t even provide a service that’s worth anything even if it didn’t come with all those downsides. Using a search engine just isn’t that difficult and AI “art” is a goddamn cancer.
It’s terrible for us and we don’t even need it! No, fuck “AI”. We have a big enough problem with people trying to find the easy way out to such a degree that they refuse to learn how anything works and slapping a big “do it for me” button on everything is just insane. I’m not saying that everything needs to difficult but we are so averse to even the slightest challenge that it leaves us with nothing but a complete lack of basic skills and an assload of insecurity.
AI is a tool. It’s not a person, it’s not a be-all-end-all of anything. Just like a person can use excel and come up with the wrong numbers, people can use AI and come up with the wrong answer.
Just like with every tool, there are people who can’t use them properly, there are people who are good enough to get modest results, and there are people who are experts at their craft who can do amazing things with them. AI is no different.
If you want a calculator, use a calculator - not AI. Use the right tool for the job and you’ll get the best result.
Studies can be made to say anything, and I know the ones you are talking about - they’re bogus.
Except that anyone who can use it properly can also just do the job without it, and the amount of damage it is doing because it’s freely available to everyone is insane.
You’re completely ignoring all my arguments. This sorta makes sense since your original reply was very “just ignore the bad stuff and it’s good!” but you’re going to have to address those things. I meanc, you did say “they’re bogus” and then not elaborate at all, but I’m assuming that if you have the energy to continuing writing comments then you would also have the energy to do the far more efficient thing and show me why those studies are bogus, right?
I think the more important thing, is for people to push to make AI a public good, rather than a corporate hegemony. If corporations are the sole creators and holders of AI, they will do all sorts of terrible things with their mastery. Publicly developed and open-sourced AI that is free for anyone to use, is important.
The refusal for the public to truly make AI their own, would be akin to letting corporations to control every single printing press.
You make a good point, and the end of this movie remains to be seen (though I agree that right now it looks like AI is here to stay).
I use AI pretty regularly to check for holes on some extremely long compliance documents for work, and the results in terms of not missing parts and reducing the time of the task is amazing, to say the least.
However, this is very different from having an agent controlled by MicroShit seeing everything you do in what is supposed to be YOUR computer, and giving it all to MicroShit to do God knows what with your data.
Yes, AI is currently the new smartphone boom, but there are many ways to use it without showing up completely naked in front of these assholes, especially since you’re not even given an option to cover yourself.
I think it’s important to still give a critical eye towards the use of AI, but at this point I think it’s clear that not only is the use of AI going to stop (even once the bubble bursts), but also that the top-end models are just becoming more and more capable every month.
A couple years ago I was giving GPT-3 complex prompts and laughing at how bad and error-prone the output was, but last week I was using GPT-5 to give me information in a field I have little knowledge of, and it’s giving me perfect answers in seconds that takes me 20+ minutes to verify as correct, and that’s tens of times faster than actually learning the field myself. Even if I were to take a year to learn it all myself, I’d then need to not only retain all of that information, but also keep up-to-date on advancements in that field, which an AI will just do over time. This way I can concentrate on the fields of work I already know and follow, but can dabble in other fields without expensive retraining or bugging others in those fields with basic questions.
I’m not sure what your point is. There are many people that like AI but don’t like Copilot. So a statistic of people liking AI is not equivalent to a statistic of people liking Copilot. That’s like saying people love my baking because people like baking in general, even though I didn’t ask anyone about my baking in particular.
So what’s your point? That not everyone likes copilot? No shit. My point was that there isn’t a “vast difference” between using/liking copilot and “AI” as you said there is.
Yeah, I’d believe it. Outside of anti-AI circlejerks people like AI, especially ones like ChatGPT, and especially if it is available right at their fingertips. It’s quickly becoming a part of everyday life and processes.
The anti-AI people need to start accepting that today and every day after it is going be the day that AI plays the smallest part in humanity’s future. The genie is out of the bottle and it’s never going back in. The sooner they can accept that and let go of the hate and see it for what it is - a useful tool to help you - the better and less angry their lives will be.
We put the leaded gasoline genie back into its bottle, time to put the AI slop genie back into its bottle too!
How useful is it really? I constantly hear about it being wrong and I’m not so stupid that I can’t handle a search through Wikipedia on my own.
Why should accept this thing that is of such little benefit to my life? Why should I accept this thing that is constantly wrong? Why should I accept this thing that just allows uncreative and insecure people to fill the internet full of garbage?
If you need AI as it is to help you do things then I pity you greatly.
You’re constantly hearing negative stuff, exaggerations, and lies most likely - especially if you are hearing it on places like this.
Ok but we know that it’s very often wrong and tries too hard to make you feel good instead of actually giving correct answers. It makes up reasons for made-up sayings, often struggles with math, and has a whole host of other issues while acting fully confident in its infallibility. We have several studies that seem to show that its use is having a negative affect on ohr critical thinking skills as well. After all that it doesn’t even provide a service that’s worth anything even if it didn’t come with all those downsides. Using a search engine just isn’t that difficult and AI “art” is a goddamn cancer.
It’s terrible for us and we don’t even need it! No, fuck “AI”. We have a big enough problem with people trying to find the easy way out to such a degree that they refuse to learn how anything works and slapping a big “do it for me” button on everything is just insane. I’m not saying that everything needs to difficult but we are so averse to even the slightest challenge that it leaves us with nothing but a complete lack of basic skills and an assload of insecurity.
AI is a tool. It’s not a person, it’s not a be-all-end-all of anything. Just like a person can use excel and come up with the wrong numbers, people can use AI and come up with the wrong answer.
Just like with every tool, there are people who can’t use them properly, there are people who are good enough to get modest results, and there are people who are experts at their craft who can do amazing things with them. AI is no different.
If you want a calculator, use a calculator - not AI. Use the right tool for the job and you’ll get the best result.
Studies can be made to say anything, and I know the ones you are talking about - they’re bogus.
Except that anyone who can use it properly can also just do the job without it, and the amount of damage it is doing because it’s freely available to everyone is insane.
You’re completely ignoring all my arguments. This sorta makes sense since your original reply was very “just ignore the bad stuff and it’s good!” but you’re going to have to address those things. I meanc, you did say “they’re bogus” and then not elaborate at all, but I’m assuming that if you have the energy to continuing writing comments then you would also have the energy to do the far more efficient thing and show me why those studies are bogus, right?
I think the more important thing, is for people to push to make AI a public good, rather than a corporate hegemony. If corporations are the sole creators and holders of AI, they will do all sorts of terrible things with their mastery. Publicly developed and open-sourced AI that is free for anyone to use, is important.
The refusal for the public to truly make AI their own, would be akin to letting corporations to control every single printing press.
You make a good point, and the end of this movie remains to be seen (though I agree that right now it looks like AI is here to stay).
I use AI pretty regularly to check for holes on some extremely long compliance documents for work, and the results in terms of not missing parts and reducing the time of the task is amazing, to say the least.
However, this is very different from having an agent controlled by MicroShit seeing everything you do in what is supposed to be YOUR computer, and giving it all to MicroShit to do God knows what with your data.
Yes, AI is currently the new smartphone boom, but there are many ways to use it without showing up completely naked in front of these assholes, especially since you’re not even given an option to cover yourself.
I think it’s important to still give a critical eye towards the use of AI, but at this point I think it’s clear that not only is the use of AI going to stop (even once the bubble bursts), but also that the top-end models are just becoming more and more capable every month.
A couple years ago I was giving GPT-3 complex prompts and laughing at how bad and error-prone the output was, but last week I was using GPT-5 to give me information in a field I have little knowledge of, and it’s giving me perfect answers in seconds that takes me 20+ minutes to verify as correct, and that’s tens of times faster than actually learning the field myself. Even if I were to take a year to learn it all myself, I’d then need to not only retain all of that information, but also keep up-to-date on advancements in that field, which an AI will just do over time. This way I can concentrate on the fields of work I already know and follow, but can dabble in other fields without expensive retraining or bugging others in those fields with basic questions.
what was it specifically?
There is a vast difference between people using/liking AI and people using/liking Copilot.
Not really. Copilot is AI, and people will be made aware that it’s available everywhere in Windows.
I’m not sure what your point is. There are many people that like AI but don’t like Copilot. So a statistic of people liking AI is not equivalent to a statistic of people liking Copilot. That’s like saying people love my baking because people like baking in general, even though I didn’t ask anyone about my baking in particular.
Oh are there? Where’s your source?
Any primary school math textbook will do as a source and tell you not all rectangles are squares, even if a square is a rectangle.
So what’s your point? That not everyone likes copilot? No shit. My point was that there isn’t a “vast difference” between using/liking copilot and “AI” as you said there is.