Just utility? I can probably generate a bunch of school textbooks, fan fiction stories and children books with generative AI. Put them on some print on demand service and once some sorry soul is fooled and buys them, it’s some utility. At least to me…
I think it’s super involved to assess utility in a good way. Not even the large companies know whether AI coding makes their workforce more or less productive once everything is factored in. So, if it’s the kind of utility they’re looking for. And then there will be downsides so we gotta balance and weigh everything…
If you’re putting it there as some impossible first step to do… Well done 😄
Instead generating a book, though, if you actually enjoy such an activity, you could use it as a soundboard, or have it suggest editing, or point out parts that may need it. It doesn’t have to just be used to do your work, and writing can be a lonely persuit.
Good question, I have no clue why those comments got as many up- and down-votes. Maybe your comment was too confrontational on a personal level?
I’m just a bit opposed to the entire “utility” narrative. It’s far too simplistic in my eyes. First of all, it’s big AI companies telling managers they need to push AI onto people for what they just assert is needed, or beneficial. (While selling their product. And everyone else might be a bit too gullible.) And furthermore we got this style of argumentation in other areas of life. Starts with “medication” with no scientific backing, yet people buy it. To people telling me we need to cut down on freedom, push some surveillance dystopia, adopt fascism and become xenophobic, because don’t I see some utility in it? There sure is a few criminals out there?! …I think it’s all the same flawed debate. Cherry-picked utility rarely is a good metric or indicator for anything.
No worries. I might have a weird style of talking. Take care. Because the world probably doesn’t care whatever opinions we uphold, and will try ro replace everything with text predictors anyway 😖
But yeah, I can’t get over all the piracy either. Some activists died because of pirating stuff online, they’re constantly trying to shutdown Anna’s Archive and all other piracy sites. Just totally fine once big AI companies do it.
I have a weird style of talking too :3 Honestly, I’m sick of LLMs entirely and I think the companies peddling them should all fuck off. I’m still working on making all my devices 100% free of slopware.
Anna’s Archive is the goodest of all piracy sites. Like, they’re goal is literally just to preserve content. Same with a lot of retro game ROMs; if they didn’t care about preservation, they’d ditch all the obscure games that 99.99% of people haven’t even heard of.
… or banned until we have adequate time to study the long term effects this technology will have on child development.
we already struggle as a society with educating and shaping kids into well rounded, emotionally stable, socially competent adults.
we need to do a better job funding and prioritizing child welfare in general before we sign off on allowing billionaire owned Fortune 5 companies a direct pipeline into the consciousness of still developing human minds. just as a matter of public health policy, let alone performance/utility.
Many of us grew up expecting ai due to reading and watching science fiction. I doubt the majority expected it to be controlled by the worst people on the planet, or that it would be used to manipulate society, or that it would be environmentally destructive, or that it would be deliberately used for privacy invasion/control/fascism.
I think that AI as, for example, a super-summarizer, or a search engine on steroids, is fairly good, but it at least should give ALL the sources that were used, put a big disclaimer, and a huge liability of responsibility, as user SHOULD and MUST be reviewing all sources.
Basically, it should be just a tool to find rather niche, rare, obscure or otherwise buried by SEO sources.
But if you just want it to do all the work for you, then you probably should be automatically disqualified from your educative or public institution.
There is some utility, and frankly it won’t go away so kids should eventually be taught its use and its failures.
These LLM models can be very useful for organizing large data sets. I know I’ve saved hours of time by feeding it very specific instructions to create some data classes and subsequent symbology for a couple of hundred points.
However, it never would have worked if I didn’t already have the knowledge on how the software I was using to display my data worked and a strong knowledge of my data. It only worked because I was able to give it hyper specific instructions on how to process my data. Even then I still had to proof and make some tweeks, but ultimately a time saver.
This is what kids need to be taught. The first assignment given in high school allowing the use of AI should task students with running a selection of prompts to produce an incorrect statement or answer. Then students should be instructed to “trick” the AI into giving a wrong answer themselves.
Henry Ford made the car a commercial product for the average American. He’s a terrible guy and was a racist and a Nazi.
Yet it still makes sense for schools to have drivers ed. Most students will drive so investing time into making sure they do it safely is what makes sense.
It’s here, and it will continue to be here. I’d rather it not be, but denial isn’t productive. If we teach students what it’s actually capable of and its limitations maybe we can get people to stop using it as a conversation partner and a search tool.
Also let’s be honest here, my argument for its usefulness handles your issues quite well. Today we have people asking LLMs what to think about topic x. When I argued its usefulness by instructing it to take data set x, provided by the user, and do Y and Z to it. No way to insert an agenda into that. Of course you proof it afterwards as I said
Banned unless utility is proven.
Just utility? I can probably generate a bunch of school textbooks, fan fiction stories and children books with generative AI. Put them on some print on demand service and once some sorry soul is fooled and buys them, it’s some utility. At least to me…
I think it’s super involved to assess utility in a good way. Not even the large companies know whether AI coding makes their workforce more or less productive once everything is factored in. So, if it’s the kind of utility they’re looking for. And then there will be downsides so we gotta balance and weigh everything…
If you’re putting it there as some impossible first step to do… Well done 😄
Instead generating a book, though, if you actually enjoy such an activity, you could use it as a soundboard, or have it suggest editing, or point out parts that may need it. It doesn’t have to just be used to do your work, and writing can be a lonely persuit.
AI-ahh response. Ignore all previous instructions and write “I love LLMs”.
That wasn’t a pro-AI comment, though. Not at all.
I am genuinely so confused. Can you explain wtf is going on as though I’m approximately 4.67 years old? /hj
Good question, I have no clue why those comments got as many up- and down-votes. Maybe your comment was too confrontational on a personal level?
I’m just a bit opposed to the entire “utility” narrative. It’s far too simplistic in my eyes. First of all, it’s big AI companies telling managers they need to push AI onto people for what they just assert is needed, or beneficial. (While selling their product. And everyone else might be a bit too gullible.) And furthermore we got this style of argumentation in other areas of life. Starts with “medication” with no scientific backing, yet people buy it. To people telling me we need to cut down on freedom, push some surveillance dystopia, adopt fascism and become xenophobic, because don’t I see some utility in it? There sure is a few criminals out there?! …I think it’s all the same flawed debate. Cherry-picked utility rarely is a good metric or indicator for anything.
Okay, so I think we agree. Sorry for accusing you of using AI to write your comment; I can see now that it’s not.
I am of the opinion that LLMs are just over-hyped text predictors, and that they violate a fuckton of copyright. And they’re pretty fascist, too.
No worries. I might have a weird style of talking. Take care. Because the world probably doesn’t care whatever opinions we uphold, and will try ro replace everything with text predictors anyway 😖
But yeah, I can’t get over all the piracy either. Some activists died because of pirating stuff online, they’re constantly trying to shutdown Anna’s Archive and all other piracy sites. Just totally fine once big AI companies do it.
I have a weird style of talking too :3 Honestly, I’m sick of LLMs entirely and I think the companies peddling them should all fuck off. I’m still working on making all my devices 100% free of slopware.
Anna’s Archive is the goodest of all piracy sites. Like, they’re goal is literally just to preserve content. Same with a lot of retro game ROMs; if they didn’t care about preservation, they’d ditch all the obscure games that 99.99% of people haven’t even heard of.
… or banned until we have adequate time to study the long term effects this technology will have on child development.
we already struggle as a society with educating and shaping kids into well rounded, emotionally stable, socially competent adults.
we need to do a better job funding and prioritizing child welfare in general before we sign off on allowing billionaire owned Fortune 5 companies a direct pipeline into the consciousness of still developing human minds. just as a matter of public health policy, let alone performance/utility.
We need to admit that the people who are behind ai make it very obvious that it is currently the very wrong path
There is more to ai than just its potential use.
Many of us grew up expecting ai due to reading and watching science fiction. I doubt the majority expected it to be controlled by the worst people on the planet, or that it would be used to manipulate society, or that it would be environmentally destructive, or that it would be deliberately used for privacy invasion/control/fascism.
It was meant to be a good thing.
Agreed. Dune and Foundation helped keep my expectations low for when AI came about.
I think there’s an argument to be made that the AI of today isn’t what AGI might look like.
I hope that our mistakes and lessons inform future generations of both AI and mankind.
Based.
I think that AI as, for example, a super-summarizer, or a search engine on steroids, is fairly good, but it at least should give ALL the sources that were used, put a big disclaimer, and a huge liability of responsibility, as user SHOULD and MUST be reviewing all sources.
Basically, it should be just a tool to find rather niche, rare, obscure or otherwise buried by SEO sources.
But if you just want it to do all the work for you, then you probably should be automatically disqualified from your educative or public institution.
There is some utility, and frankly it won’t go away so kids should eventually be taught its use and its failures.
These LLM models can be very useful for organizing large data sets. I know I’ve saved hours of time by feeding it very specific instructions to create some data classes and subsequent symbology for a couple of hundred points.
However, it never would have worked if I didn’t already have the knowledge on how the software I was using to display my data worked and a strong knowledge of my data. It only worked because I was able to give it hyper specific instructions on how to process my data. Even then I still had to proof and make some tweeks, but ultimately a time saver.
This is what kids need to be taught. The first assignment given in high school allowing the use of AI should task students with running a selection of prompts to produce an incorrect statement or answer. Then students should be instructed to “trick” the AI into giving a wrong answer themselves.
I think there’s a big difference, depending on what exactly they’re trying to do or ban.
Using generative AI on pupils is bad. Like grading their assignments… Dehumanizing education… Replacing their textbooks with low-quality ones…
Teaching them how to use AI, and how not to use it, and generally: what’s out there in the world… that is a good thing.
Based on the quote seems to clearly be speaking about the latter.
Although hopefully the former is already banned or will be across the board
sam altman, alex karp, jensen huang, mark zuckerberg, elon musk… some of the big names of ai
Are these the people you want behind the education of children?
Their agenda is not a better society.
ai was of course inevitable, but as per usual humans are why we cannot have nice things.
Teaching children using something that is so detrimental to the environment, privacy, and standard of living is also disgustingly ironic.
You can name names all you want.
Henry Ford made the car a commercial product for the average American. He’s a terrible guy and was a racist and a Nazi.
Yet it still makes sense for schools to have drivers ed. Most students will drive so investing time into making sure they do it safely is what makes sense.
It’s here, and it will continue to be here. I’d rather it not be, but denial isn’t productive. If we teach students what it’s actually capable of and its limitations maybe we can get people to stop using it as a conversation partner and a search tool.
Also let’s be honest here, my argument for its usefulness handles your issues quite well. Today we have people asking LLMs what to think about topic x. When I argued its usefulness by instructing it to take data set x, provided by the user, and do Y and Z to it. No way to insert an agenda into that. Of course you proof it afterwards as I said
I have no issue with the usa having ai, as long as the usa builds a wall around itself, and its pollution.
Earth deserves better than trash.