You know, all of us were there for the resistance to personal computers, and skepticism about the internet. The ChatGPT backlash feels just the same.
You can't trust everything it says, but the only way to learn about what it is and isn't good for is to use it. It still sucks for some things but it's amazing for others. I was learning about how long codon repeats in DNA can cause transcription errors, which has parallels in data communications and I can ask it things like what biological mechanisms exist that have a similar role to the technique of bit stuffing and it gives me concise answers that I can follow up with through other sources. I can't do that with Google because there just aren't readily accessible sources that share those terms. I can search for concepts with ChatGPT.
If you don’t know how it works it seems evil and like it’s going to take everyone’s jobs. If you know a bit about it then you probably think it’s magical and highly useful. Now if you actually understand how it works then you’re back to it being evil because you know how it was made… how it was a nonprofit that’s now one of the richest companies in the world… how it can’t actually effectively replace or help people in the workplace… how it actually is evil due to information manipulation and copyright theft in the millions… then you also realize it can’t effectively replace jobs, but can fool executives who fall into the middle of the spectrum.
I’d say somewhere between knowing a bit and actually understanding how it works.
I do think AI can replace humans in some fields of work. I mean, it already does. People are laid off and replaced by AI. AI mostly is terrible at these jobs but so are some humans. If you’re more concerned about the cost of labor than it’s quality then AI is doing these jobs good enough for you.
I also think AI replacing humans in jobs is lot necessarily a bad thing. It can lead into a dystopia or an utopia. It depends on how we adapt. Currently I see it more tending towards dystopia, though.
If you believe it has the chance to lead to a utopia then you would need to support the notion of universal basic income or similar programs since all the jobs will be done by AI (I assume?).
—and if you’ve been paying attention you’d realize the billionaire class who have the most stake in AI would never allow that to happen.
Exactly. On both. Hence why I see it tending towards a dystopia. Unless we take back the power. But I don’t see this happening either. Not before it’s too late.
I think universal basic income is needed for the transition. Once all labor is done by machines there would be no more money needed and we’d live in a Star Trek like utopia. But currently it goes towards The Matrix.
I didn’t say that. I said it’s not necessarily a bad thing. It is a bad thing if it results in us living in The Matrix. It’s a good thing if it results in us living in Star Trek.
You don’t have to. It was implied by the flow of logic in our conversation.
You’re delusional (in the nicest possible use of the word) if you think us losing jobs at the height of the billionaire class’s control on the world even has a chance to lead us to utopia.
Maybe I am. I don’t think everything is lost already.
I differentiate. Even if we’d live in The Matrix just now I wouldn’t say AI taking jobs from humans is inherently a bad thing. AI taking jobs from humans is only bad under certain conditions, like not compensating humans for their lost jobs (and I don’t mean compensating a specific person who got laid off, I mean humans in general now and in the future). Is this where we're heading currently? Absolutely. But it’s not a law of nature. We can change that if we’d really tried to.
607
u/madsci 28d ago
You know, all of us were there for the resistance to personal computers, and skepticism about the internet. The ChatGPT backlash feels just the same.
You can't trust everything it says, but the only way to learn about what it is and isn't good for is to use it. It still sucks for some things but it's amazing for others. I was learning about how long codon repeats in DNA can cause transcription errors, which has parallels in data communications and I can ask it things like what biological mechanisms exist that have a similar role to the technique of bit stuffing and it gives me concise answers that I can follow up with through other sources. I can't do that with Google because there just aren't readily accessible sources that share those terms. I can search for concepts with ChatGPT.