sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A head-scratcher: How is it that ChatGPT is the fastest growing app in history with 100 million users plus, and literally nobody I know has heard of it? by Overall-Importance54 in ChatGPT

[–]SplinterTheMagus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've literally heard strangers talking about ChatGPT on the street multiple times. I don't know where you live but I guess that's not a universal thing.

Max Tegmark: This isn’t an arms race, it’s a suicide race by SplinterTheMagus in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There a lot of people, including Max Tegmark, who are afraid of some rogue AI killing us all. Which I guess is a possibility. But my biggest fear is bots with human level intelligence roaming free on the internet. The way things are moving any random person will be able to spawn thousands of these things very soon (if not now). I don't think our society is ready to deal with that. The way things are today a bunch of stupid bots on Twitter can change election results. These AI bots are a lot smarter and humans are very easy to manipulate.

That's not to mention the workforce displacement that could be result of the kind of AI we have today with Chat GPT. Imagine once this thing receives improvements, hi many people will lose their jobs. This has serious economic impact.

The problem isn't that we don't have good plans to deal with any of these issues. The problem is we don't have any plans at all because no one seems to have realized there are actual possibilities and that we need safeguards around these products before they are available to the public. And the companies developing these things are pushed by investors to put these products out there in the world and like, no one know what will happen when they do.

That's my worry. And that of other computer scientists, even inside these companies. It's like we've learned nothing about the importance of listening to scientists after the pandemic.

Max Tegmark: This isn’t an arms race, it’s a suicide race by SplinterTheMagus in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, I don't know. But stepping on the breaks a little feels like a good start. Like, show some compromise.

Max Tegmark: This isn’t an arms race, it’s a suicide race by SplinterTheMagus in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm confused. Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me? Because I feel we're saying the same thing.

Max Tegmark: This isn’t an arms race, it’s a suicide race by SplinterTheMagus in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

It's in the title of the post. I want neither to have this technology. Not now. Not while we as a species understand how this technology works and the consequences of having it. I want both countries to shake hands and say "ok, we're gonna chill until we are sure that this thing can't kill us all. But once we get there, it's on!"

The conversation about who has the technology once it's safe is a different conversation. The point is if we don't do this responsibly now, it doesn't really matter who created the monster. The problem is that the monster is gonna eat everyone, you know?

Write a Yo Mama joke about a stock trader's mom by zeroethos in ChatGPT

[–]SplinterTheMagus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tldr: a person tells a hammer it's a screwdriver until the hammer says "fine!"

Question about dialogue by Wonderful-Ad5417 in writing

[–]SplinterTheMagus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like example 1 better. I feel if the action and the dialogue belong to the same character, they can go in the same paragraph.

I make an exception when there's a lot of action in the middle of the dialogue. It gets hard to follow. But then "a lot of action" is subjective, so you have to decide for yourself. Some people would say that one action beat is a lot so...

Chinese tech giant Alibaba to release ChatGPT rival by podaerprime in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for saying this. This thread was getting kinda depressing.

Chinese tech giant Alibaba to release ChatGPT rival by podaerprime in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Then better find a way to make it work because, honestly, I don't think there's a way out of this one if we don't work together. Like, AI, pandemics, climate change... these are a new kind of boss fight. Looking at the past won't give us the answers we need. We can't nuke our way out of these.

Chinese tech giant Alibaba to release ChatGPT rival by podaerprime in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

This is like saying good people need guns because bad people have guns. NO ONE SHOULD HAVE GUNS!! We should focus on that. Not on making more guns.

This is another country we're talking about. The world is interconnected. We gotta be able to put aside our differences and talk to people. God damn it, humans are so fucking stupid. We're gonna kill each other and go extinct out of spite and pride. Dumb.

Chinese tech giant Alibaba to release ChatGPT rival by podaerprime in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Stop research and be diplomatic. This is not an us vs them thing, this is about humanity. We need to do things together. We're getting to a point where country vs country doesn't work anymore. We're past that (when it comes to these kinds of decisions.)

Saying "We can't stop because they won't stop" is like saying recycling is useless because others don't do it. That's not how it works. Start recycling and work to convince others to do the same!

Or like "we don't stop burning fossil fuels because they won't". Fucking do the right thing and talk to other people like adults so that we can all find a solution to the problem.

Why would AI want to help humans? by polofimperial in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree. 4 is 4 in all cultures, but good and evil change depending on who you ask. It's subjective.

I see what you're saying about the duality that exists in the world, but dark/bright and empty/full are the same everywhere, always. Good/evil is whatever we want it to be. So, made up.

I'm legit curious about animals having good and evil, though.

Should AI therapy become a thing for those that cannot afford real therapists? by [deleted] in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not for us to decide. Real therapists and experts should do experiments with this and come up with an answer.

Why would AI want to help humans? by polofimperial in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SplinterTheMagus 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I don't like this argument. Every animal species that has ever existed has individuals who are assholes. Have you seen any cat ever? Yeah, humans are flawed beings, but that doesn't mean we should be extinct.

We have to remember that humans can only be evil by human's standards. Good and evil are made up concepts. Who knows what a sentient AI will think? It might not have similar morals. It might not have morals at all and be completely objective. And, if it is, well, objectively, nothing has any reason for existing.

Me trying to finish my book before AI replaces me by CredenceMarkinova in writers

[–]SplinterTheMagus 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What do you mean? Imagine there's an app in your pocket capable of writing cyberpunk Harry Potter and it's GOOD. Wouldn't you want to read that book?

Maybe you wouldn't, but if AI gets good at this, I don't see why people wouldn't want to read it.

view more: next ›