this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2023
453 points (91.4% liked)
Asklemmy
43978 readers
591 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wait til AI takes prominence. What effect on intellectualism that might have remains to be seen. As long as LLMs aren't tailored to bias certain views, it may just lift humanity.
It's just gonna pollute the internet with even more bullshit. Language models don't really understand topics, they just put together words that are likely to appear with each other. Biases are inherent to this design.
Yeah, even if it worked perfectly it would only be as smart as the training data.
Any person capable of remembering every single scientific paper would be immensely smart in my book.
So AI would be considered smarter than even the scientists in their fields.
Memorizing/knowing things has nothing to do with being smart. Would you call an encyclopedia "smart"? Conversely, you can be both ignorant and smart.
The bias is already there (even if those that own it and command that bias may claim otherwise and you may believe them) and the "lift humanity" pitch is marketing bullshit.
Press x to doubt on this.
Nothing about a glorified auto-fill will uplift humanity. We already see the opposite happening right now. LLMs output is already making the internet worse because its being flooded with auto-fill bullshit. And that in turn is making LLMs even worse over time, because instead of just being garbage out, now the garbage goes in and cimes out worse than the first time.
And its impossible for LLMs to not have bias, and ones claiming to not have bias are probably the worst of all.
LLMs are not the aspects of AI that are going to have the biggest impact. It will be AI based tools for evaluating data in the aid of specific tasks that has the big effect
Well I don't have a dog in the AI fight. I did sufficiently couch my comments as a thought experiment. I could have postulated the opposite scenario I suppose. Or none at all. I do see that there are some strong and confident predictions as to the outcomes.
Yeah most people don't "couch ideas as thought experiments" they just say what they think. Although i don't think anyone replying made a prediction really. We can already see what's happening and we know that bias is inherent to the entire design of LLMs.
I see what's already happened so far with LLMs and there is no sign of "uplifting" outside of marketing propaganda.
As soon as the AIs start saying it would make the most sense to equally distribute resources and having 10 people hoarding all the wealth is bad for the economy they're going to get some adjustments real fucking fast.
I somehow envy your optimism.
I'm already seeing people come into software dev support forums asking "ChatGPT said you could do this but it's not compiling" and people replying that no, that's not possible and them arguing about it because ChatGPT said it.
Once Elon Musk unleashes his "uncensored" AI chat bot, we're going to be flooded with made-up misinformation, it's going to be a bloodbath.