Artificial intelligence still has some way to go

Chat GPT "Write a lame excuse for handing in an essay as your own that was entirely AI-generated"

Start regularly recording your parents, elders and loved ones. With enough transcript data, new voice synthesis and video models, there is a 100% chance that they will live with you forever after leaving physical body. This should be even possible by end of the year.

— Pratik Desai (@chheplo) April 8, 2023

i watched a play about this concept a few years ago. i believe that in the end, we learned that it was creepy

this was a fucking Black Mirror episode ffs

its funny how this ai conversation is playing out over chatbots, a technology thats trained to look like talking that doesnt really care if what its saying is true or not, its hard to talk about ai in a wider sense because its very technical and because it doesnt really mean anything, so we just talk about the chatbots that make up fake quotes when student use it to write a paper for them, lol

Last month, Google released a chatbot, Bard. Weeks earlier, ethics experts recommended blocking the launch, saying Bard was dangerous and inaccurate. Their director changed the document, removing the recommendation and downplaying Bard’s risks. w/@KYWeisehttps://t.co/L2OUZO0ASd

— Nico Grant (@nicoagrant) April 7, 2023

I asked #ChatGPT for the average age of US soldiers in the Korean War. It began with a confident "22". I asked for sources. It eventually confessed to getting it from a MASH episode. pic.twitter.com/ywyRozlH9I

— Gene Zubovich (@genezubovich) April 11, 2023

how long until we have AI generated "I made ChatGPT do this thing" articles.

it doesn't actually know where it gets information, right? the second answer is just predictive text based on the two questions

I did a spot check and one of the articles it cites was attributed to the wrong institution, and another was a book published in 2010 so it's unlikely it'd have parsed the text

it's just regurgitating things related to the korean war

yeah its a chatbot not a search bot its trying to chat not give perfect info, im sure someone is attempting to address this issue but right now its just really unreliable

like idk why "it's citing M.A.S.H." is the punchline here, it's just making shit up on the fly

because its funny but yeah prob not true

brb I'm filing some patents about "factbots"

Can't wait for fact checkers to move to AI fact checking, so that we get Politifact saying JFK's head "just did that"

im c0ding patentbot

damn, outclassed again

this technology could never really vet sources unless it was programmed to only look in certain places. this would make it unable to function, because it requires a vast dataset to internalize enough pattern recognition to create syntactic sentences that respond to the topic. as far as i understand it, deep learning is a dead end for producing artificial general intelligence and this is a good thing.

in general i think the a.i. revolution is a lot of hype.

i think it will have many uses it already has some but of course the disrupt everything put everyone out of a job stuff is just silly and of course the idea of creating a general intelligence on a computer is nerd science fiction poisoning

it is fn hilarious that the thing thats blowing everyones mind currently lies constantly, just like a real person

is it trained on wikipedia? seems like it would be but maybe not

prob i imagine they just have a webcrawler soaking up whatever they can

i think it could put a number of people out of jobs. it can't run a marketing department by itself or whatever but trash copy that the department doesn't care about could be written by it, idk.

the real effect, i suspect, will be that the internet becomes even more overloaded with unreadable SEO drivel.

yes, wikipedia is part of the dataset for the major LLMs aiui. also lots of digitized books and Common Crawl: https://commoncrawl.org/

openAI won't reveal their dataset heh probably because they think it's their secret sauce

my understanding was that includes basically every publicly available piece of text

xp also copyright and privacy law violations galore!

but I don't think they're that secretive about their sources, they just claim they "filtered" them and are vague about *that*

both the image and text generation stuff is uncanny for sure and impressive superficially, but none of it has any real value. there is always something sterile and "off" about it, even before you know that it was not produced by a person.

no offense to anyone in this thread who happens to be a bot.

Go forth and sin no more.

i think it could put a number of people out of jobs. it can't run a marketing department by itself or whatever but trash copy that the department doesn't care about could be written by it, idk.

― treeship., Wednesday, April 12, 2023 11:39 AM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

doing something that no one cares about is prob not the most secure job in the first place, but regardless most office jobs arent real anyway so im not sure why people are worried about the computer stealing them when they havent already been stolen by space

in the interest of social stability and in lieu of better alternatives, we need to preserve the bullshit jobs

a huge part of marketing/website writing is learning to internalize the very inconsistent and weird preferences of some particular VP of marketing at the client and all the weird brand language stuff they prefer (and don't prefer), often you have an audience of one.

that's true. and so far a.i. cannot really do that. when they try to imitate famous authors it never works. they have no understanding of the difference between style and content, so invariably if you ask it to write something in the *style* of james joyce it will say something like "i have ambivalent feelings toward my home country, ireland, and my religious education in the roman catholic church."

i talked about this upthread with the gpt-4 version of jonathan swift that was supposed to impress us. the diction was of the 18th century, and also other little details like random capitalizations of common nouns. but there nothing of his actual style in the writing -- no irony or anger. he just described his beliefs and works the way wikipedia would.

The problem with A.I. isn't what it can't do, it's people using it to do things it can't do anyway.

But even that is less large scale harmful and more lol

Like if work began demanding AI write out training materials and it completely getting all the 402(g) limits wrong and using outdated Required Minimum Distribution info

guys, I've been holding off on admitting it, but "treeship." (note the period) is a bot I trained off of treeship's old posts

Maybe we’ve already gotten into this, but I’m looking forward to when so much content is generated by AI that it becomes a large portion of what AI is getting trained with. Then it all becomes a massive feedback loop, with AI-generated content getting more and more deranged, to the point where it shifts how we all think and talk about things. And surely human-generated content will diminish, because a lot of content-generating jobs will be eliminated! Why pay an actual person when you can just have an increasingly self-taught and rabbit-holed technology perform the same function, with “close-enough” results at much lower cost?

I fear there will be plenty of creative jobs lost to AI because plenty of people are happy with "near enough" if it's free or super cheap, they don't care if it's a bit off or sterile or whatever; so is the shit they'll be marketing with it.

If the Internet and mass culture gets that shitty there will be pushback against all of it. Having a social media presence will become lame.

will ai steal technical writing jobs? asking for a friend

no, speaking as a tech writer

you should see the laughably incorrect shit it spews out when you ask detailed solar electronics questions

I just asked it a simple 401(k) regulation question and it blew it completely (said that it is possible to roll Roth IRAs into Roth 401(k)s, which it isn't).

will ai steal technical writing jobs?

as a retired tech writer I'd agree w/ sleeve. it's not even close.

as a generalization, eventually the more generic the technology, the more vulnerable it will be to future versions of generic ai. ai that can be modified by industry-specific or company-specific modules might some day eliminate some tech writing jobs, and some other jobs might evolve to where editing ai initial drafts is a prominent part of the job.

the real hurdle will be the time/effort required to train a human writer on new developments vs training an ai. mainly, who's going to train the ai?

I work in comms and I'm not sure AI is going to replace me any time soon, but I'm already using ChatGPT regularly in my job - never for a finished product, but sometimes just for a basic first draft to get me going. There is no doubt that AI is going to be integrated into comms, but probably not in a standalone capacity, there will always have to be human oversight and editing.

lag00n otm about this chatbot version of AI being just one manifestation of a quite complex and rich field and arguably actually quite a weak example of what AI is capable of. You could even argue (i don't know enough to argue it) that chatGPT isn't really AI at all in the way commonly understood. For example, it's kind of amazing how it never, ever creates anything original. You can tell it "write me the plot outline for a novel in the style of Alexandre Dumas about a young prince who must overcome self doubt to find his destiny" and it will pepper in a few stock characters eg a mentor, a beautiful princess etc but just at the moment where you would expect a concrete detail it shies away.. it might say "he encounters many challenges" but doesn't tell you what they are. If you ask it to tell you what they are, it will give broad strokes but not the actual details. It's kind of weird!

content designer in government and agree with the above. Consultancies will push it as a cheap magic bullet, but I'd be surprised if the guidance-writing apocalypse arrives to annihilate us all. It needs a lot of human hand-holding to be really useful, but mostly it feels like there's enough legal risk around it (accountability, IP lawsuits etc) that adoption will be, in government at least, comparatively slow (maybe 2-5 years for a domain-trained writing assistant or better chatbot) & heavily supervised.

All that said, I'm reading and tinkering and trying to make sure I'm able to work in the new space opening up. Bluntly, there are going to be good day rates there during the transition.

And - absolutely no doubt people are using it already all round government. Security people seem to be thinking through how best to say 'don't put secret information into chatGPT you clowns'

Security concerns is more like a culture shift that will take a few years to work through, that's all.

It will be there, as will be jobs - the question is what type of shit will we do and for what kind of pay. Or will other types of high paying jobs be created that will in turn created resentment with the bosses.

Artificial intelligence still has some. Way to go!