[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp ] [ win ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab ]

/spg/ - Spring

Seasonal board for the Spring Season

New Reply

Options
Comment
File
Whitelist Token
Spoiler
Password (For file deletion.)
Markup tags exist for bold, itallics, header, spoiler etc. as listed in " [options] > View Formatting "


[Return] [Bottom] [Catalog]

File:beddd5e4645af7bed82050c771….png (2.79 MB,2058x1080)

 No.2006

At one point I was worried about AI being able to replace the capabilities of other people, but upon using it and adapting it into my lifestyles I've found that it behaves in a similar way to the hypothetical brain-computer interface where you can upload skills into your head or be able to directly interface with technology.
Through introducing a chatbot Q&A style interface it's much easier to acquire information, much like you could as a kid and you could ask your parents simple questions like "why is the sky blue"(and they would say Rayleigh scattering of course). Instead of having to hunt for knowledge in books you can pick it out and have it read out to you in numerous styles.

ChatGPT lets me learn a lot of concepts which I've been unable to figure out on my own. Though I might have figured them out through working with industry pros who picked it up from other pros I've been able to put the knowledge in my own hands solely through autodidacticism.
It's ability to write out examples helps greatly for people who pick things up better through written examples than they do from reading documentation and you can ask it questions and it will do it's best to answer.

So to put it in a simply, AI seems to be a tool which is best to draw out the latent potential of humanity and push people into situations where they're capable of learning anything that their brains allow them to.
At which point we can ask the question of what is done more efficiently by human and computer... since we are fundamentally different engines... one based on computation of electric signals and the other chemical transfers between neurons.

 No.2010

AI is often wrong about things and even if it were right it would still not teach you the things that reading a book or multiple books would. Kind of like how Youtubers are often wrong and often misinterpret things because they are just copying other Youtubers or reading a wiki article, so they don't have in depth knowledge of what they are talking about.

But then I guess it depends on what you actually want AI to help you with.

 No.2011

>>2010
But you can also find that the information that's taught can be misinterpreted just like it can by your own reading.

What I think it more true is that you will be skeptical of what an AI teaches you more than you will be skeptical of your own understanding of issues. It's the resistance towards wanting to accept that something is true that makes you more critical of the knowledge.

 No.2012

>>2011
Reading can be misinterpreted but the more you read the wider and deeper your knowledge of a field becomes making this less likely. So for example, one might have learnt one data point that is true and using that he leaps to other conclusions based on what limited information he knows which leads to false ideas, but if he had read a book or multiple books it might have laid out multiple other data points that give more detail and context into the first data point.
Sure, somebody can have multiple data points and still come to the wrong conclusions, but that then lies on him not what he has read.

I hope people would be more sceptical, that's another reason why it's important to state if something is written by an AI or not.

 No.2017

File:triparrot08.jpg (34.25 KB,414x356)

stochastic parrots!

 No.2055

i'm not sure, but I think I'm noticing a massive flaw in the system where it sometimes refernces articles which were never written and are no recollection of.

I ask it for a source to some information I'm skeptical of and it provides a URL of which it points to a 404 and archive.is doesn't have the URL for.
Concerning that it can't correct itself.

 No.2068


 No.2069

>>2055
in the future, AI will procedurally generate sites to quote for the sake of supporting its own arguments
this will hopefully delay the arrival of the singularity

 No.2080

>>2069
very humanoid




[Return] [Top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]

[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp ] [ win ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab ]