• Square Singer@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Totally is. Because it makes the AI look and feel much better than the smoke-and-mirrors it actually is.

    • visak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The current stuff is smoke and mirrors and not intelligent in any meaningful sense, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t dangerous. It doesn’t have to be robots with guns to screw over people. Just imagine trying to get PharmaGPT to let you refill your meds, or having to deal with BankGPT trying to figure out why it transfered your rent payment twice. And companies are sure as hell thinking about using this stuff to get rid of human decisionmakers.

      • Square Singer@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is totally true but that’s a different direction than the danger in the marketing as discussed above.

        The media is full of “AI is so amazingly great, we are all going to lose our jobs and it will take over the world.”

        That’s a quite different message than what’s really the case, which is “AI is so shitty, that it will literaly kill people with bad advice when given the chance. And business leaders are so shit that they willingly trust AI, just because it’s cheaper.”

      • theragu40@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Frankly that stuff is already a huge problem and people should be louder about it. So many large companies want you to wade through 30 layers deep menus if AI chat bots before they’ll let you talk to an actual human to get assistance with a service you pay for. It’s just going to get worse and worse.

      • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not a bad thing. Humans really aren’t good decision makers. Having a system with an incredible amount of input data will be able to draw better conclusions than a person.

        Just look at cars.

        • visak@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Humans are good decision makers, we’re just not good at paying attention for long periods of time. Which is why I think self-driving cars will eventually be better, but they aren’t yet. And those are expert systems (I refuse to call them AI) trained on a well-curated and limited set of data for a limited and specific purpose. Which is an important difference over the generalized generative models. More data does not make systems, especially more unsorted data.

          But here’s another important difference: I can grab the wheel at any time and take over. If we are going to give these systems decision making authority there needs to be an obvious and intuitive override.

          • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Self driving cars are already better than humans. The Waymo cars have a crash rate of 0.59/million miles driven. The national average is 2.98.

            I’m betting that most of the self driving car crashes were caused by humans, too.

        • x4740N@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          AI is just as biased as the data that’s put into them and that data originates from humans who have their own biases so humans are just going to pass their own biases onto the AI that makes the decisions

          I don’t think ai is a good idea

          It just exists as a replacement of the human mind and with the whole population of us on earth that’s a large enough number to contribute any unique ideas to contribute to humanity

          Creating ai would just be making some sort of copy of us

          An AI is similar to an impressionable child

          • seitanic@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Bias is a problem, but it can be ameliorated. I don’t agree that because AI can be biased, you should never use it.

            Creating ai would just be making some sort of copy of us

            I don’t know any humans who can munge a ginormous data set like an AI can.

            However, reproducing human intelligence in a computer would be interesting in its own right.

            • x4740N@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              However, reproducing human intelligence in a computer would be interesting in its own right.

              I would not try to replicate that knowing humanity it would probably view us as a threat

              I don’t know any humans who can munge a ginormous data set like an AI can.

              No humans cannot but we use tools made by us to do that

          • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why are you assuming there will be bias in the data, and that the AI couldn’t be made to correct for it? Most of the data for systems like medical AI are basically raw data, and it’s already better than humans at making an accurate diagnoses.

            I’m not sure why people seem to think humans are better than a system that can parse trillions of data points in a few seconds and apply a bunch of statistical models to it almost instantly.

            • x4740N@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I wouldn’t trust ai with medical data and neither would medical professionals since your dealong woth someone’s life here to either medical professionals are going to modify the data

              I’m not sure why people seem to think humans are better than a system that can parse trillions of data points in a few seconds and apply a bunch of statistical models to it almost instantly.

              That’s just pre-programmed pattern recognition which has been programmed by rules and data from humans

    • sleepy@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      We thought we were getting Skynet but, instead we got Super Clippy and I Can’t Believe It’s Not Art Theft

      • marcos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We thought we were getting Skynet, but instead it was “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Art Theft” that triggered the revolution and lead us to WWIII.

    • Comment105@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you see any reason to think enough iterations of random nodes in a large enough network could result in emergent conscious intelligence?

      Or are you more of a spiritualist than a materialist when it comes to the mind?

      • Square Singer@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can’t say anything about the spiritualist/materialist thing, but there are two things that are clear:

        First: Same as you won’t be able to ever get a Shakespeare work by randomly stringing letters together in any reasonable time frame, you won’t be able to do the same with conciousnes. If it’s possible, the number of incorrect permutations are so massive, that just random trying will not ever be enough in any realistic amount of time.

        Second: Transformer networks and all other generative AI concepts we have today aren’t even trying to create a conciousnes. They are not the path to general AI.