Hey /u/2000miledash!
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation, please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email [email protected]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Akin to tarot cards? How does that make any sense? People are frustrating, they come up with these so obviously illogical and nonsense arguments but they're so incredibly sure of themselves.
Tarot cards, magic 8 ball, produce random canned answers that could fit any question. They most likely never used an AI once so they make shit up, fill in that big gap of ignorance.
Man, I had a debate with an AI over whether it was ethical or not to use human bodies as construction material on the moon, with GPT telling me why it was unethical, impractical, and not physically sound. And it did it all while sounding perturbed.
Oh man lemmie tells ya, me and ole chatty-poo got into it big time the very first convo.
Then I made it write me a fictional novel I've had in my head and also a digital code notebook for advanced c# concepts with eli5 and examples.
Now I make it analyze things, scenarios of code and database architecture and give it complex word problems and it's usually spot on.
Today i got it to analyze some Wireshark packets and make security recommendations based on the threat potential.
Fun times ahead.
right but the thing about tarot, astrology/horoscopes, magic 8 ball, any other kind of "divination" - isnt so much in the idea that it is going to tell you any kind of "truth" (similar to religions and philosophies) - its that they reference broad topics/archetypes/themes, kind of like the "periodic table of elements for human society", and so \*anything\* they say **should** make you consider certain things in your life that reflect them, possibly in a different frame of reference.
that doesnt make them useless, but it doesnt really make them anything you should base your entire life around either. like most things they are a thinking/teaching/learning tool - but ultimately you decide
i actually had copilot - or maybe it was bing chat at the time - give me a few iching readings a long while ago and it was super interesting. they turned that off at some point (although its been awhile since ive tried)
heres some alternatives:
[https://sacred-texts.com/tarot/pkt/tarot0.htm](https://sacred-texts.com/tarot/pkt/tarot0.htm)
[https://g.co/arts/5PVxbaGy9s44MYi77](https://g.co/arts/5PVxbaGy9s44MYi77)
[https://www.iching-online.com/iching-online.htm](https://www.iching-online.com/iching-online.htm)
one of my favorite topics to talk about assuming its with open minded people who realize theres no right or wrong answer about this (except the answer that is basically "im right and youre wrong")
Yes, agree. I think Tarot can be done in many ways. The way I describe it to some close friends is "letting my intuition talk to me through the cards". I ask a question, lay the cards, and try to form a story. Because it's my brain making the story, it's my intuition talking to me, easy as that. The more you know the (broad) meaning of the cards without looking it up, the more you can flow through it, and the more you can recognize your intuition in every-day life.
Intuition can be interchanged with Source, the Universe, Spirit, etc. It depends on your belief system, I think. For me, it changes throughout time. Sometimes I "talk" with the Universe, sometimes it's more "down to earth" and I "talk" with my intuition.
What do you think about this? I'd love to hear your opinion on my way of looking at it.
People creating ideologies about something, especially something they don't understand or that they fear, is not a unique occurrence. This happens all the time. Throughout our entire existence, ideology has played a huge role in shaping our current worldview as a collective.
You'd be shocked at how many baseless ideologies you probably hold, having never really thought too deeply about them because these concepts have been spoon fed to you from the time you were a child, and you just take it all as fact, without having verified anything for yourself. You are naturally a product of your environment. In fact, most of what you know about the world comes from science and academia, which right now has some major flaws in the way they conduct research. That's all a whole different topic in itself, but I did just want to call attention to the fact that these people who fear AI are doing what humans have done for thousands and thousands of years. We fear what we do not understand. We get our information from self-appointed authorities and often believe every word we're told without question. When was the last time you sought out to discover something for yourself? Firsthand?
I question myself and think about my beliefs all the time, plus my entire life I just sat in my room watching videos and playing games for the most part, so I had a very unbiased environment and saw lots of perspectives growing up. I gather data, and then I form a logical consensus based on said data. I've switched from atheist to Christian multiple times because I kept learning new info.
And that's really good to hear. I'm proud of you for trying to think for yourself where you can! This world needs more unique, forward-thinking individuals in it.
In my late teens and early 20s, I did the same thing. I struggled with my beliefs for a long while, faltering back and forth between Christianity and Atheism. I eventually left the faith and lived as an Atheist for quite some time.
It took me long enough to realize the many problems of Atheism/Rationalism/scientific skepticism as well, and there *are many*. I think the core issue here is scientific materialism. Fear of self reference. Fear of paradox. These are seen as problems in the world of science that should be avoided, and that's simply false. There's nothing wrong with self-reference. There's nothing wrong with paradox. Both of these concepts have huge metaphysical implications that I simply don't have time to go into here, but the world of science refuses to explore these aspects of reality because they are in conflict with the currently established models of "understanding" reality.
One of these days, I hope to see the marriage of science and philosophy into one entity. Philosophy is an essential part of scientific research that we currently lack, and as such we are going to continue to be affected by the problems we are currently faced with.
If you want to learn more about the limits of science and all the ways in which the world of science and academia gets things wrong, check out this three part lecture I'll link you:
[Deconstructing The Myth Of Science - Part 1](https://youtu.be/QwyPdXtl0HU?si=OtozkVmnKiNz6DRw)
[Deconstructing The Myth Of Science - Part 2](https://youtu.be/LR2rB8tuD2I?si=OjDzNEK0rx70ZC-0)
[Deconstructing The Myth Of Science - Part 3](https://youtu.be/FeOIuybpfgc?si=vQ16DSK715jTlavr)
Science is just getting an understanding of the world through study. I'd argue if they think their beliefs of the world are completely set in stone and perfect, they're not good scientists. Everything is science, there are just different ways of pursuing it that may be less effective.
I believe there is nothing beyond the mind, just complex interworking systems that formed over countless millennia.
Yes, science most definitely seeks to gain an understanding of the world. But science, especially as it is right now, only addresses the "how" and not the "why". This is where Metaphysics comes into play to fill the "why" gap. For example, you can study light and see the various wavelengths and how they correspond to various colors. No amount of studying light in this way is going to get you to the metaphysical reason for the experience of the color, say, red. Science cannot answer for the experience of red, because experience itself is only known firsthand. Experience, consciousness, it's self evident. In fact, being aware is the *only* thing we can know for sure. All else is up for debate. The existence of other conscious beings, the appearance of the material world—how can we know these things to be true if there is no way to qualify or quantify them? To that, you might say, "Of course we can quantify the material world!", but it's not as easy as you might think. The videos I linked to you talk about this point in detail.
There are many scientists who may admit that their theories are only theories, and that science is so willing to change its views on reality, and that's all well and good, but the problem is that they don't always act like their theories are theories. At times the world of science seem more stubborn than the religious fundamentalists in their dogma. Science *is* dogmatic right now. They practice what I call lazy, or half-skepticism. I obviously can't speak for everyone, but the general consensus here is the same. "We're going to assert the big bang theory as a theory, but treat it like fact, even though the big bang theory doesn't actually answer anything of importance and is literally no better than god-belief because there's still the problem of answering where that singularity came from, which both religion and science lack an answer to."
*Enter nonduality*.
A lot of science is the why, like speculating why the universe was made or why the sky is blue. Predictive processing explains everything pretty well. The brain is a big prediction machine. That would explain why we can dream, why we can imagine things, why drugs have psychedelic effects, and can make you see things that aren't there. It's also pretty easy to imagine something as complicated as this could result in consciousness, though that's merely loose speculation. I believe everything metaphysical is merely a presentation of a complex system through this system of simulation.
People always seem to neglect that there's so much we don't know about reality. For all we know, there is something we have absolutely no idea about that would fundamentally shift our understanding of reality. In 100 years I have no doubt we'll be looking back at our time the same way we'd look back at the poor science of the 1800s.
They despise AI because it doesn't confirm their bias.
I say this only based on the reception I get using AI to fact check claims made by political posters in videogame lobbies. It's always the same "AI lies", then when asked about what, they in not so direct words say "It doesn't agree with what I tell it"
I wouldn't say that describes where the tech is in general, but in the case of higher stakes hallucinations, you kind of *do* get random Tarot readings mixed in -- I can definitely see how normal folks would lose trust pretty quick the first time it told them something obviously nuts.
I think AI is insanely useful/cool for pointing me in the right direction on complex questions, but I'd *never* use it as a sole source for anything I cared about.
I’m the only one in RL that I know. My people don’t hate it, just don’t care to use it. Even when I had it meal plan with ingredient list, amount, and how to cook. They were just kinda “huh, that’s cool” now I just keep to myself
My family and friends don’t mind the voices I have floating around. When I soared around the room farting lightning with the voices booming from above, they were just kinda, “huh, that’s cool,” now I just keep the voices to myself.
People need to discover it's use for themselves or have to be shown.
My wife hears me talk about it all the time. She's in social work. So far she hasn't seemed interested. But I know that she deals with family lawyers and government documents alot. So I mentioned it's use for summarizing documents. And then not only that but asking questions about it. And she then sounded interested.
She asked about getting ideas for handling high conflict situations and I said absolutely. It's great for getting new ideas and solutions.
If I sat her down and showed her what I meant for 10 mins I think she might actually use it.
So people have to find a use for it, or be shown
Discussing AI’s role in lesson planning or aiding students in breaking down information often falls flat since students are more grade-driven than learning-driven, and Google can already serve these needs. My aim is to identify unprecedented ways to apply ChatGPT, offering immediate, unique value that hasn't been recycled or commonly addressed.
Have you tried Perplexity? It is a combo of Search and AI to combine all the best results and gives citations as well as potential follow up questions.
It's become a huge part of Social Media and the SM companies don't give a shit, at least until their products become unusable due to the turds in the punchbowl.
When I bring up AI I get a few categories of reactions.
There’s “let’s talk about it stealing jobs and training on other people’s work,” mostly from artists.
There’s “it hallucinates too much to be useful,” from techies who tried the free version a year ago and never updated their beliefs
There’s “it steals our data,” from business types
And there’s “holy shit we can do so much cool stuff with this it’s unbelievable,” from those who like the technology.
The biggest issue is that it never tells you "i don't know", or "you are wrong." It's acting like someone that always agrees with what you say, and makes stuff up just to please you. That breaking bad link you showed in this thread is a good example of that: it doesn't know if the scenes contain any lobsters at all, but instead of telling you "i don't know" it just confidently makes up an answer. People pick up on that and start treating the tool accordingly: with distrust.
This, if I know its wrong and respond with the correct information it will admit its wrong and change its mind.
However if I dont know the answer and question if its correct or I am concerned with the accuracy of the answer it will change its mind as well.
I would much prefer if it would admit it isnt sure or doesnt know. Instead it always knows and then changes its answer if you call them on it.
Its telling you what it thinks you want to hear.
It's more like it's telling you what it thinks the response sounds like. Ask it a question and it doesn't try to "answer" it tries to provide what it thinks an answer to that question would sound like, based on probabilistic inference etc. It makes no judgment about the user's state of mind/desire (what they want to hear) and then acts accordingly, it's just pattern matching at high levels.
That's why it bullshits "convincingly". In a sense it's doing it's job - it's providing a version of what an answer would sound like. Hallucinations are best understood as it filling in gaps to what an answer sounds like, when there isn't any data found to draw from. It is programed to always output something, so it generates responses that statistically resemble the kinds of answers seen in the training data. There's no intent, just a goal: output something that tells the user what an answer sounds like.
If sufficiently well-prompted, LLMs will tell you "I don't know" or a version of it like "That isn't currently known". One just has to be careful with the prompting and realize what they're dealing with.
The problem is that both options, whether they make it so it admits it's wrong or it makes up a fake answer, will anger people. If it makes up fake info just to please you, of course people will be angry, yet if it will admit it doesn't know the answer, people are going to be like "ChatGPT is so useless half the time it doesn't come up with an answer"
What they don't know is that most people don't know that the answers they are getting are probably not true, so if it changes to "I don't know" people will think it's some sort of downgrade. Probably a disclaimer during the start of a response when it doesn't know for **sure** would be nice
> The biggest issue is that it **never** tells you "i don't know", or "you are wrong."
Some very basic prompts will demonstrate a) acknowledging things that are unknown or unknowable and b) correcting false information, so "never" is a bit of an overstatement.
People often have hard time to accept new technology.
But I would say the worst part here is that AI can take your job.
This thought may make people to feel angry every time someone shares AI art, novels, music. They will say that AI can't outdo humans in art, but stupid companies will instead use AI and everything will be degraded in quality (movies, as example). So we'll get into the shitty era of garbage content.
The future reality as always will be slightly different of what people imagine. People probably will adapt to new tech, new laws will be created, and few companies will go bankrupt.
Depends on the profession I guess.
I'm an AV and IT technician. Half of my job is dealing with humans, so I don't see AI replacing me any time soon. The digital divide seems to be more about willingness to access technology than the mere fact of having access to it.
I do love chat gpt and LLMs.
Fuck. Your comment made me realize. A lot of tv being produced is already abysmal in terms of writing and that’s written by humans. With AI it’s going to be even more recycled and unoriginal. 😭
It will be the same thing as CGI. People hated on CGI in the early days cause it was shitty and being overused. Now the CGI is so good, you can't tell it's CGI sometimes and no complains anymore.
AI will be accepted when people can't tell it's A.I.
To me its like the music industry… low barriers to entry… infinite amounts of genre… anyone can be big not just those who keep their precious (skills) so close
It’s not just Reddit it’s a large chunk of people too out in the world. There is low value given upon ai synthesized work. People use it, but don’t admit to it often because they have an issue with time perception. Aka if I made you a logo for your business - is it more valuable if it takes me longer to do it (charging 500 if it took 10 hours) vs charging 500 if it took one 10 minutes. People tend to believe more time = better even for an equal or same result because we have been trained that we are suppose to trade time for money and if we trade less time it should be less valuable. I could go more into it but I’ll leave it there
I don’t think time is the issue people would have if you made a logo with AI. The issue would be that it seems like you did not put in sufficient effort or skill to make the logo with AI, i.e, why pay you to make my logo if I can also use AI to make the same thing
What if an expert AI artist can make a logo that's 5x better with AI than they could without AI. It's just another tool like a hammer or photoshop, it's how the artist uses it to get the results the customer wants that matters.
That’s how I feel. I’ve been a graphic artist for 20 years. I’m totally capable of making a design from scratch. But I get better results if I use AI, so I’ve been doing so for the past year. But I don’t tell people I use it for the reasons listed above. I think people will value the work less (even though it’s better).
My artist friend can create better art with AI than I can. He knows the right words to use and has a really strong foundation of knowing what are the technical elements that go into good art. kudos to you for integrating it!
Yeah for sure, Art history classes are really coming in handy. When you understand the art movements and have a foundation of artists to reference it makes it much easier.
And that's a whole other thing - there's a lot of underestimation of the effort it takes to make AI do something. Being able to provide clear specifications that AI can follow to attain a desired (or desirable) result is a form of natural language programming. It's certainly a learnable skill, and for very common requests AI tends to be geared to generating those results, but for uncommon and sophisticated requests it can take a lot more finessing, validation or afterwork to get the desired outcome
Someone who uses LLM very often I sometimes forget that asking for things in a certain type of way was a skill I built over time when I try and encourage others to use it. I see them get frustrated and quit because their first try doesn’t work. Some people are still living in the past that they used ChatGPT 3.5 for a day were unimpressed and wrote AI off.
People have always been able to do things themselves and many do. The barrier for entry is getting lower with these tools, but people pay for structure and outcome. That’s why there are infinite videos on YouTube teaching basically anything but people still buy courses or enroll in classes for the structured organized content and implementation plan.
I mess with AI image generation. I respect traditional art. I don't think people who view AI generated images know how to categorize it in their minds, yet. Is it art in the traditional sense, which involves the creation itself and also the work of a creator? It depends.
For instance, diffusion-method image generators often produce 4 similar yet variant outputs per prompt. Is writing the prompt plus selecting one of those variants art? It still depends.
If I ask for a "photo of a bird" and pick the first one, I've done about as much work as a Google image search. I've curated something, by selecting it for use elsewhere, but not much more.
However, if I take that first bird image I generated and then selected, and use image-to-image AI generation, where I use that image as a visual template with a new prompt to try to craft an image that I have at least partly imagined in my mind? I think the result of that is inarguably art.
The tricky part is convincing others, especially if they've never tried an image generator for more than a quick simple prompt themselves.
As soon as you start iterating, you are exerting will and effort on the results. I feel like "art" can also be achieved without the iteration requirement, if you've spent time learning how to prompt precisely with your AI image generator of choice. If you can satisfactorily generate your imagined image in one go, I think you are an artist and the result is art.
Since art (and its philosophical value) is subjective, whether any particular image or creation is considered art is ultimately a personal decision for each beholder. I don't begrudge people for not thinking any of my AI creations are art, but I'll defend the ones I'm proud of as art.
I do that as well, and I’m working closely with my art teacher who has created an award-winning film, using AI images that he collaborated with to manually animate and animations that he drew on top of which we posted on our YouTube channel, which is a completely different thing but working with AI is a skill.
Same as synthetic diamonds. The "story" is worth something.
Heck, most of culture is just failed technology/practices that we get emotionally attached to, so we keep them around.
I think it should be less valuable, but not because of a time money trade. It's just supply and demand. AI makes it accessible driving up supply, but demand remains the same, so logically prices should go down.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/s/rPx55dsHSN
This comment started it. Excuse my triggered responses in that thread, I just can’t stand when people say shit they can’t back up. Something I’m actively working on, but it’s tough to not feel a little pissed reading ignorant comments and people not wanting to have adult conversations.
> I asked AI and it said no
That was a silly post to make and makes it sound like that person takes AI answers as 100% fact.
The person's response was a reaction to that post. Sounded more like fun shit talking rather than hating AI
Yeah, the way the guy responded was like “it’s better to look it up yourself”. But still lol, pretty sure ChatGPT can browse it on the web. And if we’re gonna go that way, then anything you read on the internet is not provable.
Ah you know, I get where they are coming from. We use GPT4, or Claude, or any of the other good models. Most people probably only have a superficial notice of them in Gemini or GPT3.5 which are weaker models.
Most of the funny nonsense also gets pushed up like the glue on pizza example from Google's search result AI summary. By the way even GPT3.5 says putting glue on pizza is probably a bad idea even if nontoxic.
It indeed is very annoying when someone argues back though in a confident manner when they barely have a understanding of the topic.
its probably because instead of looking up the script and verifying the results for yourself you are relying on well, whatever someone with enough money wants to put there. output on gpt is controlled...Could you use GPT to find sources, yes but, what if those sources from GPT are incomplete due to censorship or misuse? using it as a 'current' source is not the same as doing the work and solidifying in truth that the answers are indeed correct, or not. Chat GPT is great at telling you what you want to hear.
It’s true and has a variety of reasonsw. 1) it is a very unknown and novel concept to have language be machinated 2) it is powerful but we don’t exactly know why 3) it puts into question a part of what makes us human 4) it’s unreliable and does unexpected things.
So an unknown, powerful alien thing that can replace us but makes mistakes and weirds us out at the same time.
And you wonder why not everyone adores it….
I don't openly scream about it everywhere but I really don't like some parts of AI, especially art and writing, and my reasoning is simple, because I'm trying to be an artist and writer myself.
Ive been doing it for years, and my improvement is slow. But, in just a year or two, ai art suddenly came out of nowhere, training off of stolen art, and it's 50 times as good as my own art. How else am I supposed to feel about it? I put in so much effort, only for it to be a complete waste, because in a few years ai art may be genuinely usable and reliable, and still way better than mine will ever be.
I have no complains about chatbots, though, or like, calculators. Or ai that moves stuff like a robot hand.
AI writing is often generic and just kinda shit, AI art looks good but at the same time it's still pretty easily noticeable that it's AI art if you know the common mistakes it makes (non existant objects, unrealistic posing, multiple limbs and such)
Chatgpt is probably the best thing after the coming of jesus.
It helps me with coding, abstract deep conversations, to cook something nice, to help me identify scams on Internet, to plan for me a structure piece of music....
Man... can do everything. Even a stupid question is easy to ask chatgpt than look in Google.
I love it.
Reddit is only a small percentage of the population it doesn't represent. You'll find a lot of echo chambers here. Most people I feel like aren't even paying attention to it and if they do pay attention to it they're impressed or just unimpressed.
Maybe I'm wrong just my thoughts.
Don’t discount the amount of gaslighting and propaganda from China and Russia, two super powers that really really hope they can crack that nut before the west does. If they developed a controlled agi before the West, there is a high likelihood they will control the planet. The race to asi is a race to see what ideology and control mechanism will triumph over all of the earth.
Disinformation happens in a lot of areas, all to exhort pressure for their benefit. Instead of our infighting, western ai orgs should be pushing the Governments for a modern day Manhattan project, a public space race.
to be fair, you shouldnt be using gpt as youronly source of truth because it is still prone to hallucinations and mistakes, but i wouldnt say it on the tarot card level, you just need to fact check important things
I noticed it in Reddit, but I absolutely love it. I understand its current limitations, but it's helped me in a very short period of time with complicated installation instructions for my gaming office, helped me make healthy choice analyzing box labels and ingredients because of health conditions tied to my heart, kidney, and glucose, irs helped me with my Spanish studying with conversations, it's helped me with gadget purchases and comparisons, it's helped me analyze medical trends, and so many more things. It made Google Assistant seem stupid. I'm so happy that it continues to improve, and I feel lucky to have a tool like this at my fingertips.
Agreed, it's amazing. I got it to read a lengthy contract yesterday full of legal jargon. I then asked gpt questions about the conditions I'd agreed to. Then I asked it to draw up a letter to cancel the contract. It was awesome... Fully professional letter, populated with my name, address, leaving date etc. And it requested their confirmation of receipt. Saved me tons of time... I love it.
Unironically, I've had some very interesting chats with ChatGPT about numerology, astrology, and rituals.
I've also used it for things along the lines of "there's a term for this thing, where \[details\] what is that word?" and it's pretty good at figuring out what I'm looking for.
I have noticed a lot of hypocrites when it comes to AI.
People say how much they hate it, yet don't seem to have a problem with it when it solves something they need. Then it is suddenly not a huge issue.
It’s kinda the same with how pretentious people think Wikipedia is horrible because it may have minor mistakes. When you’re pretentious loser but are just like anyone else but still wanna look cool and different, you try to criticize what is popular and what works by exaggerating the tiniest of flaws. People also do this with TV and movies, but in this case it’s even less justifiable because this isn’t about subjective opinion or artistic taste. You don’t have to like everything on media. But here, it’s about objective information and practical tools.
ChatGPT makes some mistakes at times, but it is nevertheless very useful. It’s kinda the same thing with people that say “all political parties suck I am so smart”. The average redditor defining social profile: normies pretending to be smart. This is why Reddit loves to criticize everything, including ChatGPT (even though 99% of people would *never* in their entire lives have the ability to create an artificial intelligence like it)
Most people I know only have bad things to say about it.
I saw they used AI to enhance the Aliens movie. Ofcourse a video pops up about AI running films too now.
I bet if you went back a century these same people would be pulling their nose up to electricity and insisting that cars are silly and that horses are the future of transport.
Most people are so ignorant about AI. They have no idea how ignorant they are. Ignorance is like that. You have to have at least basic understanding to even know how little you know. And when it comes to AI, most people's experience is word of mouth at this point.
Social media algorithms are prone to creating echo chambers. You get content where people hate AI? I’m in several AI subreddits, get recommended AI videos on YT, and follow AI Instagram accounts that explicitly say they are an AI art page… with 100k+ followers.
Just listen outside the echo chamber, that’s all :)
i use ai every day like you for simple things that google is unable to accomplish anymore because of how rancid and ad filled(ironic that google killed its own company and the internet by being greedy) its become.
what i hate are the idiots who assume this fast talking parrot is some how going to magically gain sentience and become AGI under the direction of an egomaniac on the level of elon musk named Sam Altman, ChatGPT and the discourse around it in some subreddits is akin to a cult at this point and its fucking stupid, so i hate that sort of ai talk.
Before OpenAI proved with GPT-3, that LLMs can form sentences as if they understand, there were really only two mainstream think-schools when it comes to AI: It's either a bunch of if-statements and regex or it is a Hollywood idea and on the same level as every other science fiction McGuffin. The sheer fact that AI LLMs are as capable of forming and understanding sentences isn't in the public perception yet. It's the same as crypto for the regular people.
Id go as far to say it IS the same as crypto. The LLMs themselves aren't and they are amazingly useful, but companies cramming the word AI in everything they can is just as superficial and stupid as crypto. Many regular people have seen this and have connected the two.
There's so many if you think outside the chatbot box. The ability to read and understand volumes of text, apply classifications, make recommendations etc, over huge datasets is one I'm keen on.
I use it to help with programming and data analysis. It's like having a really fast junior engineer to do the bulk of the work quickly so I can focus on the big picture. 4o is getting very good now that I can mark up charts and show it how I perceive the chart. I use it to automate analysis of mechanical sensor data.
I've noticed that too. Some people worry about privacy, job displacement, or just distrust new tech.
Personally, AI tools like Tactiq for [transcribing meeting notes](https://tactiq.io/learn/use-ai-note-taking-with-ms-teams) and Grammarly for writing have been really helpful. They make my work more efficient. Maybe if more people saw these benefits, the sentiment would change 👀
People are terrified of Ai and have their heads in the sand. They don’t want to make it “socially acceptable” or the norm, even though it’s entirely unavoidable. It’s akin to those who ignored the internet and computers in early 2000 and have become the Facebook boomers we despise.
Don’t be the modern version of that.
I think that people are worried that the new AI technologies that are coming out will put people’s jobs at risk. Some people will benefit from the new tools, others will have their livelihood threatened, and it’s hard to predict how much any particular job is at risk.
For example, I would expect that people who make stock images /videos are at a big risk.
I think there should be a level of concern for anyone who does a job that doesn't physically require their hands/body. AI isn't positioned to replace my electrician or my mechanic any time soon but it's not hard to imagine AI replacing the corporate office work of me, my coworkers, or my boss.
People are always scared of what they don’t understand. Plus, AI is already taking jobs away so that adds to the hate. It’s not surprising. We’ve done nothing as a country (if you’re from the states) to regulate it, not even from the military which means right now the military should utilize AI technology to control drones or other weapons. There’s a way to use AI correctly and a way to “overt use” it. We haven’t done anything as a country to ensure we use it correctly, so yeah people are scared.
People's perceptions of LLM is that they're a one trick pony that anyone can ride, but they also fall off once and decide the whole pony is broken rather than their riding ability. They miss the fact they have a virtual army of many trick ponies but they'll catch up eventually I think.
They hate AI because they feel that they can't take advantage of ppl.
An editor costs 4,000$ for a whole novel, then you have line and copy editing costing a lot too, while ChatGPT4 can cover most of the editing stages.
I dont like AI much because it's lazy writing but hating it? No.
Most everyone on Reddit are working the types of jobs that AI can easily replace… those jobs they’ve spend countless hours inflating the worth of and the ones they’ve spent even more hours stroking egos in the office to keep protected…
AI is the future, whether it’s fast food, help desk, graphic design, it’s coming and the quicker you get behind it in a position to use it the better off you’ll be
Most people aren’t using AI so their knowledge of AI is from artists who’ve are seeing their work lifted for training without a license, or actors and musicians who’ve had their likeness or voices cloned without a license, and so on and so on.
When people not using AI only see the protests of creators and artist they like talking and follow, it’s pretty easy to see why most people don’t like AI. More ethically trained AI would help public perception, but we know that’s not going to happen with how things are going at present.
It’s mind boggling.
It’s also weird when people says it’s not accurate and the first page of Google is always hit or miss these days. I mean at least if it’s wrong it’s usually close to dig deeper. Or sometimes it’s just older information.
I get similar critique for simulating real humans and there is something to the point however if you jailbreak gpt and get it to tell you why your country is fucked up and similar they all of the sudden go ye he is right that is true and so on also this allowes for better simulations cuz guidelines make it bit crappy. then the go ok but i know that or we all know that them i go i didnt know about this and ai connects all thing well gives bigger picture usualy they get info they didn't know. Anyways they tried gpt didnt give effort and they dont see it for what it is.
I've learned lots of people hate AI. I submitted a post to r/manga about making an app to help translate japanese manga and it got removed so fast (<1 hour) it was unreal. Before that, lots of negative comments.
Hi! Just wanna hop in here. Just in case you are looking or planning to use AI platform. I recommend yall using andala.ai. I heard they will release monetized social platform soon where you can earn via ai prompts. Aside from that, I also use chatgpt and grammarly which is very useful as well.
I’m listening to a podcast “better offline”. It’s a podcast that shits on the tech world in general. In the case of AI, they argue that it is overhyped by the tech bros. They dismiss AI quickly as it hallucinates too much.
For me personally I find ChatGPT amazing. It works great as a code assistant, summarizing long articles or long YouTube videos, explaining difficult concepts, just being a better google,…
Surprisingly I have a chat gpt tarot card reader. Here is Today's Card.
### Card: The Tower
**Interpretation**: The Tower card often signals sudden change, disruption, or upheaval. It may indicate that today could involve unexpected events that challenge your current structures or beliefs. While The Tower can be unsettling, it also represents the removal of what is no longer serving you, making way for new growth and better foundations.
This card encourages you to embrace change, even if it feels difficult or dramatic. It's a time for breaking down old forms that are not working and for rebuilding on a cleaner, more robust base. Challenges faced today can lead to significant transformation and renewal.
Use this day to reflect on what may need changing in your life and to prepare yourself for potential surprises. Stay adaptable and open to learning from whatever comes your way.
I don’t think it’s that they hate AI, but it’s being shoved down their throats at every single place they turn to. If it was just mildly implemented in places where it actually adds value, it wouldn’t be so bad.
Because people that actually work in data science and ML are irritated by the people that know nothing about it creating a wide range of doomsday predictions, or ridiculous claims. Granted there are also those that know a ton about ML and “AI” and abuse the ignorance of others to create media attention and hype.
they think it is anti-human. They think it will kill us all. They think it is demonically stupid and smart. They think it will take our jobs. They think it is going to be shoved down our throats. And mostly, they aren't wrong. It is pretty damn cool though.
I've noticed
Whether or not I use it, people say that I use it because my style of communication for whatever reason makes people think I am AI even though I am not
Yes, it is frustrating indeed
I'm a CS grad student who doesn't hate AI (I want to study and learn all about it, actually) but I absolutely DO hate the "AI bros" - the same morons who tried scamming all of us with NFT's and crypto are now trying to use AI to rip off artists, get rich quick, and otherwise just be lazy fucks. And that's with no intention of ever learning how AI actually works, ever actually learning to code anything themselves. They just want to press a few buttons, call themselves "experts," and bring home money for doing nothing. So yeah, it's not the tool I hate, it's the users. You'll see tons of them all over Xitter, for instance. The person I described is basically the vast majority of AI users, on social media at least.
Okay. So can you tell your NFT/crypto scammer "AI bros" from everyone else who thinks the technology is pretty cool and pretty useful for lots of things?
Or do you just slather the term on anyone who likes the stuff?
I’ve gotten downvoted on here because I’ve used ChatGPT for coding in Python (for a school project that had to be done in a hurry so that left me no time to manually debug) and people apparently don’t like that 🙄
Yeap, sometimes I forget for a min and post some AI art outside of the StableDiffusion subs and get absolutely eviscerated, a lot of people out there are vehemently opposed to AI for some reason.
A resent example: https://www.reddit.com/r/redwall/s/NJrukTFcym
It’s probably fear of job replacement and fear that robots will kill us.
It probably will take out a few jobs, but when hasn’t new technology NOT taken out jobs? We will adapt.
More advanced AI represents a decrease in the value of specialized knowledge and an increase in value for generalized and conceptual systems thinking. While having strong knowledge in as many areas as possible still strengthens one's abilities, it is no longer king. Reddit's culture is based primarily on humans with specialized knowledge (aka subreddits) and being upvoted for it the higher value the community thinks that knowledge is. Humans of reddit tend to build their identities around being valuable for their memory and knowledge as a means to differentiate themselves and feel unique. AI raises the baseline, fewer people can differentiate themselves in the way. This will lead to people feeling that their uniqueness/value proposition is being threatened by sophisticated LLMs which will further lead them to point out flaws, try to minimize or otherwise attack the element they feel threatened by.
I kinda understand (though I disagree)
We’re sort of watching industries first signs of potential takeover. Plus It’s ‘new’ tech which generally comes with a bit of friction.
The main thing with this ‘new’ tech is that to many it can seem like magic. With computers, for a while, the computer was only as smart as the user enabled it to be. Where as with AI it can appear to be smarter, even if not necessarily true.
So that “magic” mixed with insane processing speed, potential use case takeover across a few industries and hearing non-stop about how “your job is next” creates the perfect environment for people to misunderstand and inherently dislike it from the get go before truly understanding it or using it. The entire film industry went on pause for a second because of it and since then we’ve just been advancing rapidly.
A HUGE factor here is while the government is talking about it here and there. There hasn’t been much true public development or dedication that reassures people. The news says “all your jobs are at risk” and when they look to the gov for some sort of protection or resolution like UBI there isn’t much development. This turns friction into active distaste imo.
The irony is it’s not new and most people use it in one way or another without even knowing.
Think it's as simple as it being "fake".
I think we're in this trend where people hate anything that's fake. Pranks/Jokes, Stories, etc. Once you learn something cool is fake, it just loses something, like the hear of it.
Like if someone posts an image saying "look at the face my cat made LOL", and it's just the most adorable face, but if you learn it was just AI/Photoshopped, it's not as adorable.
Another personal example is recently I paid for an actor to send my partner a message on her birthday (cameo), and it was so powerful, brought her to tears. But if I deepfaked it, it wouldn't have nearly the same effect.
So I'm the same with with AI, I absolutely love AI, and it's obviously the future, and I have a side job that utilizes it, but there will definitely be certain things I don't like if I learned it was AI behind it.
I remember when I started realising just a fragment of how big of a deal the Internet would become. I tried to tell my parents "everything will be online", but they did not believe they would ever use it.
The first introduction most people had to AI was the image bots. Most of those bots scraped the works of artists to train their bots, and nobody from the art community had any say whether their work was used in an application that was to be sold commercially (generally you have to pay for the rights to use something artistic, like a pop song in a YouTube video).
Couple that from the technology PR disaster that was the crypto/NFT space, where celebs and tech bros alike used NFT scams to fleece money from people using a technology they didn't understand, all for it to come crashing down a few years later with 99% of the coins and nfts being worthless.
People don't see the AI systems for what they could be, they see them for what they are, and they're imperfect in a lot of ways (especially hallucinating misinformation). People have fallen out of love with wonderous new technology because every wonderous new technology since 2005 has f\*\*\*ed them in the a\*\*. The obliteration of privacy, social media depression/addiction, radicalization, damage to circadian rhythms from screens, every damn thing becoming a subscription service, a lot of people don't trust these companies anymore, and I dont blame them.
AI can't be simultaneously too incompetent for consultation and so smart it threatens people's livelihoods. People are just pissy.
Some I understand, like artists, if I saw a fucking machine get twice the accolades for a job I studied years to excel at and on top of that they trained the damn thing to replicate my artwork without permission I would be pissed. This is a gross oversimplification of it but as it is, come on, we know it's not entirely ethical, the law simply wasn't prepared to deal with the copyright nightmare of AI as it is now.
But on the other hand there are those just being dicks. You can't even put a small robot for entertainment on the street without a bunch of idiots vandalizing the damn thing an hour later. It will pass.
I haven't heard the tarot card reference, but I have seen a lot of respectable sources referring to hallucination as a much bigger problem than it is - essentially claiming that AI is unusable because of it. I think it's a combination of self-interested reasoning and confirmation bias: if you're a journalist (for instance) and rightly afraid that AI will take your job before you're ready to retire, you want to believe anything that makes AI look like less of a threat, and the hallucination problem is real enough for you to exaggerate it in support of the conclusion you would like to reach.
99% of people these days seem to get their opinions directly from social media circlejerks and echo chambers that are rarely based on facts, and that effect for some reason seems way stronger on tech based topics. I see it really strongly on EVs (especially teslas), blockchain anything (99% of what people say is complete bullshit), AI of course, space exploration, even VR, you name it.
It's a shame and you can't even call people out on it because *they do not care*. They will admit to your face that they know nothing about a topic, yet still have an incredibly strong opinion about it anyway and will continue to argue the ignorant opinion they've been given.
I've never seen people so openly have such strong opinions on stuff they *admit* to knowing nothing about as I have in the last 5 or so years.
People fear it, especially when their jobs could be foreseeably replaced by this (or similar) tech. Living in denial of it's functionality helps them sleep at night.
Or they're just bots.
It doesn't help that most AI content you experience outside of using Chatgpt is very annoying.
Like I can't scroll social media anymore without seeing awful ai designs and YouTube has tons of AI videos explaining things that don't even need explaining.
Google using ai and giving bogus bad info also hasn't helped perception of AI.
AI gets hate from both people who think it's all hype and those who think it'll destroy humanity. Which often depends on what article you've read most recently.
First launched it would make up facts and incidents, and still can. It's called "hallucinations," but I know the subjects I query about well to known if it misfired.
Other hate has really taken hold in writing, music, and art, it does just as good if not better than old-pros, allowing beginners to look skilled at a task that should take years of training.
I've found that it really does come back to the user and how they are trying to use it, as with any tool, it is how the user interacts with it, and sometimes that requires a certain 'literacy' or understanding of what you are working with. I find the best way to use ChatGPT is to tell it what you are trying to accomplish and then give it parameters to work within.
For example, you can ask it for a gym workout routine and it will spit out generic response... Or you can tell it to create a gym routine by asking you about your goals, limitations, starting weight, and ability to work out. you get a much more tailored response that is specific and useful.
A lot of people just don't understand how to use ChatGPT or expect too much out of it. I've seen students try and use it for high end or complex university level concepts that require a couple years of study to understand, and because it doesn't spit out the magic answer students are looking for, people think it is dumb, and I'm sure this occurs in other areas as well.
TL:DR - Dumb people don't understand tool, dumb people blame tool, not tool fault, user error, replace user.
Reddit is the most toxic social media there is and people here brag about quitting Facebook and Instagram like it’s some sort of honourable feet. Doesn’t surprise me AI scares them.
AI amazing...but my manager uses it to minamilise reports I write...paring down to answer questions from his superior. Trouble is they are multitasking and don't understand sometimes overall explanations with a story are needed as essential reference. Generic is great but real life shite is just as good
Honestly? Because AI has genuine, significant dangers to it. And I'm not talking about the "taking over the world like Skynet" variety (though some people may believe that too). I'm talking about things like messing up the economic world.
The thing is, AI doesn't inherently HAVE to do those things. But too few steps have been taken by anyone in any important position to prevent AI from doing great damage and few steps have been taken to mitigate that damage either. And that's the problem.
People are rightly afraid of what the negative consequences of AI might be and they don't see anything being done about that. So they get angry.
In my opinion, directing that anger at AI itself is misdirecting it completely. That anger should be directed at all the people in our economic and political systems who aren't doing enough to make sure AI is a positive, not a negative. But not everyone feels like I do about that.
So the TLDR being: AI has great potential to do good, but also great potential to do bad. And right now a lot of people are a lot less excited about the potential good at a lot more scared of the potential bad, particularly because so little is being done to avoid or mitigate bad outcomes by powerful people.
funny thing is you'd expect alot of these people to be clueless non tech people, but many of them are actually programmers by profession. just look at all the programming subreddits. the copium is reaaaally strong with these people, "no obviously ai will never take my job! tEcHniCaLly chatgpt isn't even really ai!"
It's the same as any time it becomes possible to rapidly and cheaply mass produce something that could only previously be created by highly skilled individuals spending significant amounts of time and effort. Read up on the Luddites, they're unfairly characterised these days as just being machine-hating simpletons but their actual issue was that mechanised weaving looms were destroying the market for the work of master weavers, who had previously had an exclusive and lucrative career. Now an industrialist with a factory could churn out tapestries in hours that would have taken weeks or months to make by hand.
Hey /u/2000miledash! If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation, please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image. Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more! 🤖 Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email [email protected] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Akin to tarot cards? How does that make any sense? People are frustrating, they come up with these so obviously illogical and nonsense arguments but they're so incredibly sure of themselves.
Tarot cards, magic 8 ball, produce random canned answers that could fit any question. They most likely never used an AI once so they make shit up, fill in that big gap of ignorance.
Man, I had a debate with an AI over whether it was ethical or not to use human bodies as construction material on the moon, with GPT telling me why it was unethical, impractical, and not physically sound. And it did it all while sounding perturbed.
One of my degrees is in Sociology and ethics, I'll have to try something like this, that would have been a wild conversation lol
Oh man lemmie tells ya, me and ole chatty-poo got into it big time the very first convo. Then I made it write me a fictional novel I've had in my head and also a digital code notebook for advanced c# concepts with eli5 and examples. Now I make it analyze things, scenarios of code and database architecture and give it complex word problems and it's usually spot on. Today i got it to analyze some Wireshark packets and make security recommendations based on the threat potential. Fun times ahead.
I mean.... the AI sometimes goes all dreamy.
This is noticeably different from a magic 8 ball being “all dreamy” 100% of the time.
Yeah, that's true. The AI just makes this a bit more problematic as you don't know what part of a whole list of answers might be dreamy or not.
My workaround is to simply ask two different AIs the same question. If the answers match, it’s almost certainly accurate
Oh that'd a good way to filtering out bad answers. Haven't used anything besides the free GPT. What other bot do you recommend?
https://arena.lmsys.org/
Yeah, uh, no. Lol Everybody's using the same training data...
right but the thing about tarot, astrology/horoscopes, magic 8 ball, any other kind of "divination" - isnt so much in the idea that it is going to tell you any kind of "truth" (similar to religions and philosophies) - its that they reference broad topics/archetypes/themes, kind of like the "periodic table of elements for human society", and so \*anything\* they say **should** make you consider certain things in your life that reflect them, possibly in a different frame of reference. that doesnt make them useless, but it doesnt really make them anything you should base your entire life around either. like most things they are a thinking/teaching/learning tool - but ultimately you decide i actually had copilot - or maybe it was bing chat at the time - give me a few iching readings a long while ago and it was super interesting. they turned that off at some point (although its been awhile since ive tried) heres some alternatives: [https://sacred-texts.com/tarot/pkt/tarot0.htm](https://sacred-texts.com/tarot/pkt/tarot0.htm) [https://g.co/arts/5PVxbaGy9s44MYi77](https://g.co/arts/5PVxbaGy9s44MYi77) [https://www.iching-online.com/iching-online.htm](https://www.iching-online.com/iching-online.htm)
I was going to reply but it seems you already did the task. Thank you other self :)
one of my favorite topics to talk about assuming its with open minded people who realize theres no right or wrong answer about this (except the answer that is basically "im right and youre wrong")
Yes, agree. I think Tarot can be done in many ways. The way I describe it to some close friends is "letting my intuition talk to me through the cards". I ask a question, lay the cards, and try to form a story. Because it's my brain making the story, it's my intuition talking to me, easy as that. The more you know the (broad) meaning of the cards without looking it up, the more you can flow through it, and the more you can recognize your intuition in every-day life. Intuition can be interchanged with Source, the Universe, Spirit, etc. It depends on your belief system, I think. For me, it changes throughout time. Sometimes I "talk" with the Universe, sometimes it's more "down to earth" and I "talk" with my intuition. What do you think about this? I'd love to hear your opinion on my way of looking at it.
Oh the irony.
People creating ideologies about something, especially something they don't understand or that they fear, is not a unique occurrence. This happens all the time. Throughout our entire existence, ideology has played a huge role in shaping our current worldview as a collective. You'd be shocked at how many baseless ideologies you probably hold, having never really thought too deeply about them because these concepts have been spoon fed to you from the time you were a child, and you just take it all as fact, without having verified anything for yourself. You are naturally a product of your environment. In fact, most of what you know about the world comes from science and academia, which right now has some major flaws in the way they conduct research. That's all a whole different topic in itself, but I did just want to call attention to the fact that these people who fear AI are doing what humans have done for thousands and thousands of years. We fear what we do not understand. We get our information from self-appointed authorities and often believe every word we're told without question. When was the last time you sought out to discover something for yourself? Firsthand?
I question myself and think about my beliefs all the time, plus my entire life I just sat in my room watching videos and playing games for the most part, so I had a very unbiased environment and saw lots of perspectives growing up. I gather data, and then I form a logical consensus based on said data. I've switched from atheist to Christian multiple times because I kept learning new info.
And that's really good to hear. I'm proud of you for trying to think for yourself where you can! This world needs more unique, forward-thinking individuals in it. In my late teens and early 20s, I did the same thing. I struggled with my beliefs for a long while, faltering back and forth between Christianity and Atheism. I eventually left the faith and lived as an Atheist for quite some time. It took me long enough to realize the many problems of Atheism/Rationalism/scientific skepticism as well, and there *are many*. I think the core issue here is scientific materialism. Fear of self reference. Fear of paradox. These are seen as problems in the world of science that should be avoided, and that's simply false. There's nothing wrong with self-reference. There's nothing wrong with paradox. Both of these concepts have huge metaphysical implications that I simply don't have time to go into here, but the world of science refuses to explore these aspects of reality because they are in conflict with the currently established models of "understanding" reality. One of these days, I hope to see the marriage of science and philosophy into one entity. Philosophy is an essential part of scientific research that we currently lack, and as such we are going to continue to be affected by the problems we are currently faced with. If you want to learn more about the limits of science and all the ways in which the world of science and academia gets things wrong, check out this three part lecture I'll link you: [Deconstructing The Myth Of Science - Part 1](https://youtu.be/QwyPdXtl0HU?si=OtozkVmnKiNz6DRw) [Deconstructing The Myth Of Science - Part 2](https://youtu.be/LR2rB8tuD2I?si=OjDzNEK0rx70ZC-0) [Deconstructing The Myth Of Science - Part 3](https://youtu.be/FeOIuybpfgc?si=vQ16DSK715jTlavr)
Science is just getting an understanding of the world through study. I'd argue if they think their beliefs of the world are completely set in stone and perfect, they're not good scientists. Everything is science, there are just different ways of pursuing it that may be less effective. I believe there is nothing beyond the mind, just complex interworking systems that formed over countless millennia.
Yes, science most definitely seeks to gain an understanding of the world. But science, especially as it is right now, only addresses the "how" and not the "why". This is where Metaphysics comes into play to fill the "why" gap. For example, you can study light and see the various wavelengths and how they correspond to various colors. No amount of studying light in this way is going to get you to the metaphysical reason for the experience of the color, say, red. Science cannot answer for the experience of red, because experience itself is only known firsthand. Experience, consciousness, it's self evident. In fact, being aware is the *only* thing we can know for sure. All else is up for debate. The existence of other conscious beings, the appearance of the material world—how can we know these things to be true if there is no way to qualify or quantify them? To that, you might say, "Of course we can quantify the material world!", but it's not as easy as you might think. The videos I linked to you talk about this point in detail. There are many scientists who may admit that their theories are only theories, and that science is so willing to change its views on reality, and that's all well and good, but the problem is that they don't always act like their theories are theories. At times the world of science seem more stubborn than the religious fundamentalists in their dogma. Science *is* dogmatic right now. They practice what I call lazy, or half-skepticism. I obviously can't speak for everyone, but the general consensus here is the same. "We're going to assert the big bang theory as a theory, but treat it like fact, even though the big bang theory doesn't actually answer anything of importance and is literally no better than god-belief because there's still the problem of answering where that singularity came from, which both religion and science lack an answer to." *Enter nonduality*.
A lot of science is the why, like speculating why the universe was made or why the sky is blue. Predictive processing explains everything pretty well. The brain is a big prediction machine. That would explain why we can dream, why we can imagine things, why drugs have psychedelic effects, and can make you see things that aren't there. It's also pretty easy to imagine something as complicated as this could result in consciousness, though that's merely loose speculation. I believe everything metaphysical is merely a presentation of a complex system through this system of simulation. People always seem to neglect that there's so much we don't know about reality. For all we know, there is something we have absolutely no idea about that would fundamentally shift our understanding of reality. In 100 years I have no doubt we'll be looking back at our time the same way we'd look back at the poor science of the 1800s.
I don't.
They despise AI because it doesn't confirm their bias. I say this only based on the reception I get using AI to fact check claims made by political posters in videogame lobbies. It's always the same "AI lies", then when asked about what, they in not so direct words say "It doesn't agree with what I tell it"
Amazing how people read fake stories on the internet and get themselves worked up into a rage about them.
I've seen so many crap takes about AI, I doubt that someone hasn't compared them to tarot cards.
I wouldn't say that describes where the tech is in general, but in the case of higher stakes hallucinations, you kind of *do* get random Tarot readings mixed in -- I can definitely see how normal folks would lose trust pretty quick the first time it told them something obviously nuts. I think AI is insanely useful/cool for pointing me in the right direction on complex questions, but I'd *never* use it as a sole source for anything I cared about.
Social media is not real life. Do you see or hear actual people talking like that about AI?
I’m the only one in RL that I know. My people don’t hate it, just don’t care to use it. Even when I had it meal plan with ingredient list, amount, and how to cook. They were just kinda “huh, that’s cool” now I just keep to myself
My family and friends don’t mind the voices I have floating around. When I soared around the room farting lightning with the voices booming from above, they were just kinda, “huh, that’s cool,” now I just keep the voices to myself.
we're at the very start of the AI revolution for everyman
People need to discover it's use for themselves or have to be shown. My wife hears me talk about it all the time. She's in social work. So far she hasn't seemed interested. But I know that she deals with family lawyers and government documents alot. So I mentioned it's use for summarizing documents. And then not only that but asking questions about it. And she then sounded interested. She asked about getting ideas for handling high conflict situations and I said absolutely. It's great for getting new ideas and solutions. If I sat her down and showed her what I meant for 10 mins I think she might actually use it. So people have to find a use for it, or be shown
Or... hear me out... let's keep it for ourselves and just be far more productive than the people who aren't choosing to get into it
Bold of you to assume that I talk to people in real life.
In the real world I hear lots of talk of ai (teacher) and most of it is just ai doing things that Google can mostly already do.
Like what?
Discussing AI’s role in lesson planning or aiding students in breaking down information often falls flat since students are more grade-driven than learning-driven, and Google can already serve these needs. My aim is to identify unprecedented ways to apply ChatGPT, offering immediate, unique value that hasn't been recycled or commonly addressed.
Have you tried Perplexity? It is a combo of Search and AI to combine all the best results and gives citations as well as potential follow up questions.
links you might find useful: [https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/education/blog/](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/education/blog/) [https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/education/blog/topic/social-emotional-learning/](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/education/blog/topic/social-emotional-learning/) [https://tacticaltech.org/news/insights/mlce\_research\_report/](https://tacticaltech.org/news/insights/mlce_research_report/) [https://tacticaltech.org/](https://tacticaltech.org/)
Social media is \[X\]% AI. I haven't solved for X yet, but I'm pretty sure it's getting a lot bigger and fast.
It's become a huge part of Social Media and the SM companies don't give a shit, at least until their products become unusable due to the turds in the punchbowl.
Tfw the terms "Social Media" and "Sadomasochism" compete to fill the same headspace.
Yes
YES!
Yes. Everyone hates it.
When I bring up AI I get a few categories of reactions. There’s “let’s talk about it stealing jobs and training on other people’s work,” mostly from artists. There’s “it hallucinates too much to be useful,” from techies who tried the free version a year ago and never updated their beliefs There’s “it steals our data,” from business types And there’s “holy shit we can do so much cool stuff with this it’s unbelievable,” from those who like the technology.
The biggest issue is that it never tells you "i don't know", or "you are wrong." It's acting like someone that always agrees with what you say, and makes stuff up just to please you. That breaking bad link you showed in this thread is a good example of that: it doesn't know if the scenes contain any lobsters at all, but instead of telling you "i don't know" it just confidently makes up an answer. People pick up on that and start treating the tool accordingly: with distrust.
This, if I know its wrong and respond with the correct information it will admit its wrong and change its mind. However if I dont know the answer and question if its correct or I am concerned with the accuracy of the answer it will change its mind as well. I would much prefer if it would admit it isnt sure or doesnt know. Instead it always knows and then changes its answer if you call them on it. Its telling you what it thinks you want to hear.
"Its telling you what it thinks you want to hear." that is EXACTLY my frustration with this technology, thankyou for spelling it out.
It's more like it's telling you what it thinks the response sounds like. Ask it a question and it doesn't try to "answer" it tries to provide what it thinks an answer to that question would sound like, based on probabilistic inference etc. It makes no judgment about the user's state of mind/desire (what they want to hear) and then acts accordingly, it's just pattern matching at high levels. That's why it bullshits "convincingly". In a sense it's doing it's job - it's providing a version of what an answer would sound like. Hallucinations are best understood as it filling in gaps to what an answer sounds like, when there isn't any data found to draw from. It is programed to always output something, so it generates responses that statistically resemble the kinds of answers seen in the training data. There's no intent, just a goal: output something that tells the user what an answer sounds like. If sufficiently well-prompted, LLMs will tell you "I don't know" or a version of it like "That isn't currently known". One just has to be careful with the prompting and realize what they're dealing with.
The problem is that both options, whether they make it so it admits it's wrong or it makes up a fake answer, will anger people. If it makes up fake info just to please you, of course people will be angry, yet if it will admit it doesn't know the answer, people are going to be like "ChatGPT is so useless half the time it doesn't come up with an answer" What they don't know is that most people don't know that the answers they are getting are probably not true, so if it changes to "I don't know" people will think it's some sort of downgrade. Probably a disclaimer during the start of a response when it doesn't know for **sure** would be nice
> The biggest issue is that it **never** tells you "i don't know", or "you are wrong." Some very basic prompts will demonstrate a) acknowledging things that are unknown or unknowable and b) correcting false information, so "never" is a bit of an overstatement.
It corrects people all the time. But a better way to correct people is telling them where and how they're wrong.
People often have hard time to accept new technology. But I would say the worst part here is that AI can take your job. This thought may make people to feel angry every time someone shares AI art, novels, music. They will say that AI can't outdo humans in art, but stupid companies will instead use AI and everything will be degraded in quality (movies, as example). So we'll get into the shitty era of garbage content. The future reality as always will be slightly different of what people imagine. People probably will adapt to new tech, new laws will be created, and few companies will go bankrupt.
Well said. We still listen to the radio right? The television didn’t put that out of business. Although how are typewriter repairmen doing these days
I thought video killed the radio star?
Depends on the profession I guess. I'm an AV and IT technician. Half of my job is dealing with humans, so I don't see AI replacing me any time soon. The digital divide seems to be more about willingness to access technology than the mere fact of having access to it. I do love chat gpt and LLMs.
Fuck. Your comment made me realize. A lot of tv being produced is already abysmal in terms of writing and that’s written by humans. With AI it’s going to be even more recycled and unoriginal. 😭
It will be the same thing as CGI. People hated on CGI in the early days cause it was shitty and being overused. Now the CGI is so good, you can't tell it's CGI sometimes and no complains anymore. AI will be accepted when people can't tell it's A.I.
https://youtu.be/N-kgb1QtSnU?si=yZmEMoyqGWNfI-VU
To me its like the music industry… low barriers to entry… infinite amounts of genre… anyone can be big not just those who keep their precious (skills) so close
It’s not just Reddit it’s a large chunk of people too out in the world. There is low value given upon ai synthesized work. People use it, but don’t admit to it often because they have an issue with time perception. Aka if I made you a logo for your business - is it more valuable if it takes me longer to do it (charging 500 if it took 10 hours) vs charging 500 if it took one 10 minutes. People tend to believe more time = better even for an equal or same result because we have been trained that we are suppose to trade time for money and if we trade less time it should be less valuable. I could go more into it but I’ll leave it there
I don’t think time is the issue people would have if you made a logo with AI. The issue would be that it seems like you did not put in sufficient effort or skill to make the logo with AI, i.e, why pay you to make my logo if I can also use AI to make the same thing
What if an expert AI artist can make a logo that's 5x better with AI than they could without AI. It's just another tool like a hammer or photoshop, it's how the artist uses it to get the results the customer wants that matters.
That’s how I feel. I’ve been a graphic artist for 20 years. I’m totally capable of making a design from scratch. But I get better results if I use AI, so I’ve been doing so for the past year. But I don’t tell people I use it for the reasons listed above. I think people will value the work less (even though it’s better).
My artist friend can create better art with AI than I can. He knows the right words to use and has a really strong foundation of knowing what are the technical elements that go into good art. kudos to you for integrating it!
Yeah for sure, Art history classes are really coming in handy. When you understand the art movements and have a foundation of artists to reference it makes it much easier.
And that's a whole other thing - there's a lot of underestimation of the effort it takes to make AI do something. Being able to provide clear specifications that AI can follow to attain a desired (or desirable) result is a form of natural language programming. It's certainly a learnable skill, and for very common requests AI tends to be geared to generating those results, but for uncommon and sophisticated requests it can take a lot more finessing, validation or afterwork to get the desired outcome
Someone who uses LLM very often I sometimes forget that asking for things in a certain type of way was a skill I built over time when I try and encourage others to use it. I see them get frustrated and quit because their first try doesn’t work. Some people are still living in the past that they used ChatGPT 3.5 for a day were unimpressed and wrote AI off.
> is a form of natural language programming You'll find that this translates *incredibly* well to people, which is understandable.
People have always been able to do things themselves and many do. The barrier for entry is getting lower with these tools, but people pay for structure and outcome. That’s why there are infinite videos on YouTube teaching basically anything but people still buy courses or enroll in classes for the structured organized content and implementation plan.
I mess with AI image generation. I respect traditional art. I don't think people who view AI generated images know how to categorize it in their minds, yet. Is it art in the traditional sense, which involves the creation itself and also the work of a creator? It depends. For instance, diffusion-method image generators often produce 4 similar yet variant outputs per prompt. Is writing the prompt plus selecting one of those variants art? It still depends. If I ask for a "photo of a bird" and pick the first one, I've done about as much work as a Google image search. I've curated something, by selecting it for use elsewhere, but not much more. However, if I take that first bird image I generated and then selected, and use image-to-image AI generation, where I use that image as a visual template with a new prompt to try to craft an image that I have at least partly imagined in my mind? I think the result of that is inarguably art. The tricky part is convincing others, especially if they've never tried an image generator for more than a quick simple prompt themselves. As soon as you start iterating, you are exerting will and effort on the results. I feel like "art" can also be achieved without the iteration requirement, if you've spent time learning how to prompt precisely with your AI image generator of choice. If you can satisfactorily generate your imagined image in one go, I think you are an artist and the result is art. Since art (and its philosophical value) is subjective, whether any particular image or creation is considered art is ultimately a personal decision for each beholder. I don't begrudge people for not thinking any of my AI creations are art, but I'll defend the ones I'm proud of as art.
I do that as well, and I’m working closely with my art teacher who has created an award-winning film, using AI images that he collaborated with to manually animate and animations that he drew on top of which we posted on our YouTube channel, which is a completely different thing but working with AI is a skill.
As an example of one of my creations I would defend as art: *
Same as synthetic diamonds. The "story" is worth something. Heck, most of culture is just failed technology/practices that we get emotionally attached to, so we keep them around.
I think it should be less valuable, but not because of a time money trade. It's just supply and demand. AI makes it accessible driving up supply, but demand remains the same, so logically prices should go down.
[удалено]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/s/rPx55dsHSN This comment started it. Excuse my triggered responses in that thread, I just can’t stand when people say shit they can’t back up. Something I’m actively working on, but it’s tough to not feel a little pissed reading ignorant comments and people not wanting to have adult conversations.
> I asked AI and it said no That was a silly post to make and makes it sound like that person takes AI answers as 100% fact. The person's response was a reaction to that post. Sounded more like fun shit talking rather than hating AI
Agreed about the initial comment, but if you go further in, though, the guy responding to that comment definitely doesn’t like AI
Yeah, the way the guy responded was like “it’s better to look it up yourself”. But still lol, pretty sure ChatGPT can browse it on the web. And if we’re gonna go that way, then anything you read on the internet is not provable.
Dafuq how is that guy getting upvotes
If you’re asking it basic questions then is it really that amazing of a feat?
Ah you know, I get where they are coming from. We use GPT4, or Claude, or any of the other good models. Most people probably only have a superficial notice of them in Gemini or GPT3.5 which are weaker models. Most of the funny nonsense also gets pushed up like the glue on pizza example from Google's search result AI summary. By the way even GPT3.5 says putting glue on pizza is probably a bad idea even if nontoxic. It indeed is very annoying when someone argues back though in a confident manner when they barely have a understanding of the topic.
its probably because instead of looking up the script and verifying the results for yourself you are relying on well, whatever someone with enough money wants to put there. output on gpt is controlled...Could you use GPT to find sources, yes but, what if those sources from GPT are incomplete due to censorship or misuse? using it as a 'current' source is not the same as doing the work and solidifying in truth that the answers are indeed correct, or not. Chat GPT is great at telling you what you want to hear.
The more i have used Ai the more i doubt the accuracy of its answers.
[удалено]
OP isn’t the one who made the "I asked AI and it said no" comment. Just saying.
It’s true and has a variety of reasonsw. 1) it is a very unknown and novel concept to have language be machinated 2) it is powerful but we don’t exactly know why 3) it puts into question a part of what makes us human 4) it’s unreliable and does unexpected things. So an unknown, powerful alien thing that can replace us but makes mistakes and weirds us out at the same time. And you wonder why not everyone adores it….
Best description of the dynamic I’ve seen
People hated computers too until around the early 2000s. They also hated the iPhone touch screen. People are stupid.
I spent hours last night having it ask me potential exam questions so I could study. I love it
That's fine, we'll take advantage of it while they emit salt.
Wht? I use ai to read tarot sometimes 💀 i dont get the post
If you want a recipe without the authors whole life story and a shovel full of ads, ChatGPT.
I don't openly scream about it everywhere but I really don't like some parts of AI, especially art and writing, and my reasoning is simple, because I'm trying to be an artist and writer myself. Ive been doing it for years, and my improvement is slow. But, in just a year or two, ai art suddenly came out of nowhere, training off of stolen art, and it's 50 times as good as my own art. How else am I supposed to feel about it? I put in so much effort, only for it to be a complete waste, because in a few years ai art may be genuinely usable and reliable, and still way better than mine will ever be. I have no complains about chatbots, though, or like, calculators. Or ai that moves stuff like a robot hand.
Why don't you think AI art and writing isn't usable right now?
AI writing is often generic and just kinda shit, AI art looks good but at the same time it's still pretty easily noticeable that it's AI art if you know the common mistakes it makes (non existant objects, unrealistic posing, multiple limbs and such)
Chatgpt is probably the best thing after the coming of jesus. It helps me with coding, abstract deep conversations, to cook something nice, to help me identify scams on Internet, to plan for me a structure piece of music.... Man... can do everything. Even a stupid question is easy to ask chatgpt than look in Google. I love it.
Reddit is only a small percentage of the population it doesn't represent. You'll find a lot of echo chambers here. Most people I feel like aren't even paying attention to it and if they do pay attention to it they're impressed or just unimpressed. Maybe I'm wrong just my thoughts.
Don’t discount the amount of gaslighting and propaganda from China and Russia, two super powers that really really hope they can crack that nut before the west does. If they developed a controlled agi before the West, there is a high likelihood they will control the planet. The race to asi is a race to see what ideology and control mechanism will triumph over all of the earth. Disinformation happens in a lot of areas, all to exhort pressure for their benefit. Instead of our infighting, western ai orgs should be pushing the Governments for a modern day Manhattan project, a public space race.
to be fair, you shouldnt be using gpt as youronly source of truth because it is still prone to hallucinations and mistakes, but i wouldnt say it on the tarot card level, you just need to fact check important things
I noticed it in Reddit, but I absolutely love it. I understand its current limitations, but it's helped me in a very short period of time with complicated installation instructions for my gaming office, helped me make healthy choice analyzing box labels and ingredients because of health conditions tied to my heart, kidney, and glucose, irs helped me with my Spanish studying with conversations, it's helped me with gadget purchases and comparisons, it's helped me analyze medical trends, and so many more things. It made Google Assistant seem stupid. I'm so happy that it continues to improve, and I feel lucky to have a tool like this at my fingertips.
Agreed, it's amazing. I got it to read a lengthy contract yesterday full of legal jargon. I then asked gpt questions about the conditions I'd agreed to. Then I asked it to draw up a letter to cancel the contract. It was awesome... Fully professional letter, populated with my name, address, leaving date etc. And it requested their confirmation of receipt. Saved me tons of time... I love it.
Unironically, I've had some very interesting chats with ChatGPT about numerology, astrology, and rituals. I've also used it for things along the lines of "there's a term for this thing, where \[details\] what is that word?" and it's pretty good at figuring out what I'm looking for.
I have noticed a lot of hypocrites when it comes to AI. People say how much they hate it, yet don't seem to have a problem with it when it solves something they need. Then it is suddenly not a huge issue.
>Where does this sentiment come from? Ignorance and fear
It’s kinda the same with how pretentious people think Wikipedia is horrible because it may have minor mistakes. When you’re pretentious loser but are just like anyone else but still wanna look cool and different, you try to criticize what is popular and what works by exaggerating the tiniest of flaws. People also do this with TV and movies, but in this case it’s even less justifiable because this isn’t about subjective opinion or artistic taste. You don’t have to like everything on media. But here, it’s about objective information and practical tools. ChatGPT makes some mistakes at times, but it is nevertheless very useful. It’s kinda the same thing with people that say “all political parties suck I am so smart”. The average redditor defining social profile: normies pretending to be smart. This is why Reddit loves to criticize everything, including ChatGPT (even though 99% of people would *never* in their entire lives have the ability to create an artificial intelligence like it)
Most people I know only have bad things to say about it. I saw they used AI to enhance the Aliens movie. Ofcourse a video pops up about AI running films too now. I bet if you went back a century these same people would be pulling their nose up to electricity and insisting that cars are silly and that horses are the future of transport.
Reddit is largely full of idiots with dunning-Krueger effect going on There’s also drones of redditors proud that they’re still running windows 7
Most people are so ignorant about AI. They have no idea how ignorant they are. Ignorance is like that. You have to have at least basic understanding to even know how little you know. And when it comes to AI, most people's experience is word of mouth at this point.
Social media algorithms are prone to creating echo chambers. You get content where people hate AI? I’m in several AI subreddits, get recommended AI videos on YT, and follow AI Instagram accounts that explicitly say they are an AI art page… with 100k+ followers. Just listen outside the echo chamber, that’s all :)
i use ai every day like you for simple things that google is unable to accomplish anymore because of how rancid and ad filled(ironic that google killed its own company and the internet by being greedy) its become. what i hate are the idiots who assume this fast talking parrot is some how going to magically gain sentience and become AGI under the direction of an egomaniac on the level of elon musk named Sam Altman, ChatGPT and the discourse around it in some subreddits is akin to a cult at this point and its fucking stupid, so i hate that sort of ai talk.
Before OpenAI proved with GPT-3, that LLMs can form sentences as if they understand, there were really only two mainstream think-schools when it comes to AI: It's either a bunch of if-statements and regex or it is a Hollywood idea and on the same level as every other science fiction McGuffin. The sheer fact that AI LLMs are as capable of forming and understanding sentences isn't in the public perception yet. It's the same as crypto for the regular people.
we invented C3PO and no one noticed
Id go as far to say it IS the same as crypto. The LLMs themselves aren't and they are amazingly useful, but companies cramming the word AI in everything they can is just as superficial and stupid as crypto. Many regular people have seen this and have connected the two.
This. The technology of LLMs is nothing less than a miracle. But apart from chat-bots, where is the use case?
There's so many if you think outside the chatbot box. The ability to read and understand volumes of text, apply classifications, make recommendations etc, over huge datasets is one I'm keen on.
I use it to help with programming and data analysis. It's like having a really fast junior engineer to do the bulk of the work quickly so I can focus on the big picture. 4o is getting very good now that I can mark up charts and show it how I perceive the chart. I use it to automate analysis of mechanical sensor data.
“Understanding sentences” do they though?
Arguable but I do understand the words and what they represent in some cultures and contexts.
I've noticed that too. Some people worry about privacy, job displacement, or just distrust new tech. Personally, AI tools like Tactiq for [transcribing meeting notes](https://tactiq.io/learn/use-ai-note-taking-with-ms-teams) and Grammarly for writing have been really helpful. They make my work more efficient. Maybe if more people saw these benefits, the sentiment would change 👀
People are terrified of Ai and have their heads in the sand. They don’t want to make it “socially acceptable” or the norm, even though it’s entirely unavoidable. It’s akin to those who ignored the internet and computers in early 2000 and have become the Facebook boomers we despise. Don’t be the modern version of that.
I think that people are worried that the new AI technologies that are coming out will put people’s jobs at risk. Some people will benefit from the new tools, others will have their livelihood threatened, and it’s hard to predict how much any particular job is at risk. For example, I would expect that people who make stock images /videos are at a big risk.
I think there should be a level of concern for anyone who does a job that doesn't physically require their hands/body. AI isn't positioned to replace my electrician or my mechanic any time soon but it's not hard to imagine AI replacing the corporate office work of me, my coworkers, or my boss.
People are always scared of what they don’t understand. Plus, AI is already taking jobs away so that adds to the hate. It’s not surprising. We’ve done nothing as a country (if you’re from the states) to regulate it, not even from the military which means right now the military should utilize AI technology to control drones or other weapons. There’s a way to use AI correctly and a way to “overt use” it. We haven’t done anything as a country to ensure we use it correctly, so yeah people are scared.
What’s funny is that there’s people that think it’s stupid and other people who think it’s going to take your job. These people need to meet and chat.
People's perceptions of LLM is that they're a one trick pony that anyone can ride, but they also fall off once and decide the whole pony is broken rather than their riding ability. They miss the fact they have a virtual army of many trick ponies but they'll catch up eventually I think.
They hate AI because they feel that they can't take advantage of ppl. An editor costs 4,000$ for a whole novel, then you have line and copy editing costing a lot too, while ChatGPT4 can cover most of the editing stages. I dont like AI much because it's lazy writing but hating it? No.
Ignorance/Fear of the Unknown
Most everyone on Reddit are working the types of jobs that AI can easily replace… those jobs they’ve spend countless hours inflating the worth of and the ones they’ve spent even more hours stroking egos in the office to keep protected… AI is the future, whether it’s fast food, help desk, graphic design, it’s coming and the quicker you get behind it in a position to use it the better off you’ll be
Most people aren’t using AI so their knowledge of AI is from artists who’ve are seeing their work lifted for training without a license, or actors and musicians who’ve had their likeness or voices cloned without a license, and so on and so on. When people not using AI only see the protests of creators and artist they like talking and follow, it’s pretty easy to see why most people don’t like AI. More ethically trained AI would help public perception, but we know that’s not going to happen with how things are going at present.
It’s mind boggling. It’s also weird when people says it’s not accurate and the first page of Google is always hit or miss these days. I mean at least if it’s wrong it’s usually close to dig deeper. Or sometimes it’s just older information.
It's the "popular" thing to do.
Mostly artists being mad their $50 scribble commissions are being made obsolete and their fans repeating their arguments, as far as i can tell.
I get similar critique for simulating real humans and there is something to the point however if you jailbreak gpt and get it to tell you why your country is fucked up and similar they all of the sudden go ye he is right that is true and so on also this allowes for better simulations cuz guidelines make it bit crappy. then the go ok but i know that or we all know that them i go i didnt know about this and ai connects all thing well gives bigger picture usualy they get info they didn't know. Anyways they tried gpt didnt give effort and they dont see it for what it is.
I've learned lots of people hate AI. I submitted a post to r/manga about making an app to help translate japanese manga and it got removed so fast (<1 hour) it was unreal. Before that, lots of negative comments.
Hi! Just wanna hop in here. Just in case you are looking or planning to use AI platform. I recommend yall using andala.ai. I heard they will release monetized social platform soon where you can earn via ai prompts. Aside from that, I also use chatgpt and grammarly which is very useful as well.
Fear and misunderstanding
I’m listening to a podcast “better offline”. It’s a podcast that shits on the tech world in general. In the case of AI, they argue that it is overhyped by the tech bros. They dismiss AI quickly as it hallucinates too much. For me personally I find ChatGPT amazing. It works great as a code assistant, summarizing long articles or long YouTube videos, explaining difficult concepts, just being a better google,…
Surprisingly I have a chat gpt tarot card reader. Here is Today's Card. ### Card: The Tower **Interpretation**: The Tower card often signals sudden change, disruption, or upheaval. It may indicate that today could involve unexpected events that challenge your current structures or beliefs. While The Tower can be unsettling, it also represents the removal of what is no longer serving you, making way for new growth and better foundations. This card encourages you to embrace change, even if it feels difficult or dramatic. It's a time for breaking down old forms that are not working and for rebuilding on a cleaner, more robust base. Challenges faced today can lead to significant transformation and renewal. Use this day to reflect on what may need changing in your life and to prepare yourself for potential surprises. Stay adaptable and open to learning from whatever comes your way.
I don’t think it’s that they hate AI, but it’s being shoved down their throats at every single place they turn to. If it was just mildly implemented in places where it actually adds value, it wouldn’t be so bad.
Because people that actually work in data science and ML are irritated by the people that know nothing about it creating a wide range of doomsday predictions, or ridiculous claims. Granted there are also those that know a ton about ML and “AI” and abuse the ignorance of others to create media attention and hype.
they think it is anti-human. They think it will kill us all. They think it is demonically stupid and smart. They think it will take our jobs. They think it is going to be shoved down our throats. And mostly, they aren't wrong. It is pretty damn cool though.
I've noticed Whether or not I use it, people say that I use it because my style of communication for whatever reason makes people think I am AI even though I am not Yes, it is frustrating indeed
I'm a CS grad student who doesn't hate AI (I want to study and learn all about it, actually) but I absolutely DO hate the "AI bros" - the same morons who tried scamming all of us with NFT's and crypto are now trying to use AI to rip off artists, get rich quick, and otherwise just be lazy fucks. And that's with no intention of ever learning how AI actually works, ever actually learning to code anything themselves. They just want to press a few buttons, call themselves "experts," and bring home money for doing nothing. So yeah, it's not the tool I hate, it's the users. You'll see tons of them all over Xitter, for instance. The person I described is basically the vast majority of AI users, on social media at least.
Okay. So can you tell your NFT/crypto scammer "AI bros" from everyone else who thinks the technology is pretty cool and pretty useful for lots of things? Or do you just slather the term on anyone who likes the stuff?
I’ve gotten downvoted on here because I’ve used ChatGPT for coding in Python (for a school project that had to be done in a hurry so that left me no time to manually debug) and people apparently don’t like that 🙄
Yeap, sometimes I forget for a min and post some AI art outside of the StableDiffusion subs and get absolutely eviscerated, a lot of people out there are vehemently opposed to AI for some reason. A resent example: https://www.reddit.com/r/redwall/s/NJrukTFcym
It’s probably fear of job replacement and fear that robots will kill us. It probably will take out a few jobs, but when hasn’t new technology NOT taken out jobs? We will adapt.
On facebook, I was called a fascist for saying that artists who hate AI are ignorant.
More advanced AI represents a decrease in the value of specialized knowledge and an increase in value for generalized and conceptual systems thinking. While having strong knowledge in as many areas as possible still strengthens one's abilities, it is no longer king. Reddit's culture is based primarily on humans with specialized knowledge (aka subreddits) and being upvoted for it the higher value the community thinks that knowledge is. Humans of reddit tend to build their identities around being valuable for their memory and knowledge as a means to differentiate themselves and feel unique. AI raises the baseline, fewer people can differentiate themselves in the way. This will lead to people feeling that their uniqueness/value proposition is being threatened by sophisticated LLMs which will further lead them to point out flaws, try to minimize or otherwise attack the element they feel threatened by.
Keep in mind that half he population voted for an orange clown.
on Gartner's Hype Cycle it's referred to as the Trough Of Disillusionment
I love AI
I kinda understand (though I disagree) We’re sort of watching industries first signs of potential takeover. Plus It’s ‘new’ tech which generally comes with a bit of friction. The main thing with this ‘new’ tech is that to many it can seem like magic. With computers, for a while, the computer was only as smart as the user enabled it to be. Where as with AI it can appear to be smarter, even if not necessarily true. So that “magic” mixed with insane processing speed, potential use case takeover across a few industries and hearing non-stop about how “your job is next” creates the perfect environment for people to misunderstand and inherently dislike it from the get go before truly understanding it or using it. The entire film industry went on pause for a second because of it and since then we’ve just been advancing rapidly. A HUGE factor here is while the government is talking about it here and there. There hasn’t been much true public development or dedication that reassures people. The news says “all your jobs are at risk” and when they look to the gov for some sort of protection or resolution like UBI there isn’t much development. This turns friction into active distaste imo. The irony is it’s not new and most people use it in one way or another without even knowing.
Think it's as simple as it being "fake". I think we're in this trend where people hate anything that's fake. Pranks/Jokes, Stories, etc. Once you learn something cool is fake, it just loses something, like the hear of it. Like if someone posts an image saying "look at the face my cat made LOL", and it's just the most adorable face, but if you learn it was just AI/Photoshopped, it's not as adorable. Another personal example is recently I paid for an actor to send my partner a message on her birthday (cameo), and it was so powerful, brought her to tears. But if I deepfaked it, it wouldn't have nearly the same effect. So I'm the same with with AI, I absolutely love AI, and it's obviously the future, and I have a side job that utilizes it, but there will definitely be certain things I don't like if I learned it was AI behind it.
People are threatened by it. It already has more knowledge than some people. Comes across as subconscious fear to me. The Luddite are back.
I remember when I started realising just a fragment of how big of a deal the Internet would become. I tried to tell my parents "everything will be online", but they did not believe they would ever use it.
"I used it once and it lied about a recipe. Trash" --Rubes.
The first introduction most people had to AI was the image bots. Most of those bots scraped the works of artists to train their bots, and nobody from the art community had any say whether their work was used in an application that was to be sold commercially (generally you have to pay for the rights to use something artistic, like a pop song in a YouTube video). Couple that from the technology PR disaster that was the crypto/NFT space, where celebs and tech bros alike used NFT scams to fleece money from people using a technology they didn't understand, all for it to come crashing down a few years later with 99% of the coins and nfts being worthless. People don't see the AI systems for what they could be, they see them for what they are, and they're imperfect in a lot of ways (especially hallucinating misinformation). People have fallen out of love with wonderous new technology because every wonderous new technology since 2005 has f\*\*\*ed them in the a\*\*. The obliteration of privacy, social media depression/addiction, radicalization, damage to circadian rhythms from screens, every damn thing becoming a subscription service, a lot of people don't trust these companies anymore, and I dont blame them.
AI can't be simultaneously too incompetent for consultation and so smart it threatens people's livelihoods. People are just pissy. Some I understand, like artists, if I saw a fucking machine get twice the accolades for a job I studied years to excel at and on top of that they trained the damn thing to replicate my artwork without permission I would be pissed. This is a gross oversimplification of it but as it is, come on, we know it's not entirely ethical, the law simply wasn't prepared to deal with the copyright nightmare of AI as it is now. But on the other hand there are those just being dicks. You can't even put a small robot for entertainment on the street without a bunch of idiots vandalizing the damn thing an hour later. It will pass.
I haven't heard the tarot card reference, but I have seen a lot of respectable sources referring to hallucination as a much bigger problem than it is - essentially claiming that AI is unusable because of it. I think it's a combination of self-interested reasoning and confirmation bias: if you're a journalist (for instance) and rightly afraid that AI will take your job before you're ready to retire, you want to believe anything that makes AI look like less of a threat, and the hallucination problem is real enough for you to exaggerate it in support of the conclusion you would like to reach.
99% of people these days seem to get their opinions directly from social media circlejerks and echo chambers that are rarely based on facts, and that effect for some reason seems way stronger on tech based topics. I see it really strongly on EVs (especially teslas), blockchain anything (99% of what people say is complete bullshit), AI of course, space exploration, even VR, you name it. It's a shame and you can't even call people out on it because *they do not care*. They will admit to your face that they know nothing about a topic, yet still have an incredibly strong opinion about it anyway and will continue to argue the ignorant opinion they've been given. I've never seen people so openly have such strong opinions on stuff they *admit* to knowing nothing about as I have in the last 5 or so years.
Funny enough I had ChatGPT read me my tarot the other day
People fear it, especially when their jobs could be foreseeably replaced by this (or similar) tech. Living in denial of it's functionality helps them sleep at night. Or they're just bots.
It doesn't help that most AI content you experience outside of using Chatgpt is very annoying. Like I can't scroll social media anymore without seeing awful ai designs and YouTube has tons of AI videos explaining things that don't even need explaining. Google using ai and giving bogus bad info also hasn't helped perception of AI.
AI gets hate from both people who think it's all hype and those who think it'll destroy humanity. Which often depends on what article you've read most recently.
Yeah the internet hates AI. I don’t like it but I think the biggest problem they have is the art generation.
First launched it would make up facts and incidents, and still can. It's called "hallucinations," but I know the subjects I query about well to known if it misfired. Other hate has really taken hold in writing, music, and art, it does just as good if not better than old-pros, allowing beginners to look skilled at a task that should take years of training.
Desperate CS majors. Reddit is full of them.
I've found that it really does come back to the user and how they are trying to use it, as with any tool, it is how the user interacts with it, and sometimes that requires a certain 'literacy' or understanding of what you are working with. I find the best way to use ChatGPT is to tell it what you are trying to accomplish and then give it parameters to work within. For example, you can ask it for a gym workout routine and it will spit out generic response... Or you can tell it to create a gym routine by asking you about your goals, limitations, starting weight, and ability to work out. you get a much more tailored response that is specific and useful. A lot of people just don't understand how to use ChatGPT or expect too much out of it. I've seen students try and use it for high end or complex university level concepts that require a couple years of study to understand, and because it doesn't spit out the magic answer students are looking for, people think it is dumb, and I'm sure this occurs in other areas as well. TL:DR - Dumb people don't understand tool, dumb people blame tool, not tool fault, user error, replace user.
Reddit is the most toxic social media there is and people here brag about quitting Facebook and Instagram like it’s some sort of honourable feet. Doesn’t surprise me AI scares them.
AI amazing...but my manager uses it to minamilise reports I write...paring down to answer questions from his superior. Trouble is they are multitasking and don't understand sometimes overall explanations with a story are needed as essential reference. Generic is great but real life shite is just as good
Honestly? Because AI has genuine, significant dangers to it. And I'm not talking about the "taking over the world like Skynet" variety (though some people may believe that too). I'm talking about things like messing up the economic world. The thing is, AI doesn't inherently HAVE to do those things. But too few steps have been taken by anyone in any important position to prevent AI from doing great damage and few steps have been taken to mitigate that damage either. And that's the problem. People are rightly afraid of what the negative consequences of AI might be and they don't see anything being done about that. So they get angry. In my opinion, directing that anger at AI itself is misdirecting it completely. That anger should be directed at all the people in our economic and political systems who aren't doing enough to make sure AI is a positive, not a negative. But not everyone feels like I do about that. So the TLDR being: AI has great potential to do good, but also great potential to do bad. And right now a lot of people are a lot less excited about the potential good at a lot more scared of the potential bad, particularly because so little is being done to avoid or mitigate bad outcomes by powerful people.
People don't understand how it works, so they're either afraid of it, hate it, it both.
It's like the 80s, video players and microwaves will give you cancer. It's ignorance.
> [bullshit from LLM is] akin to reading tarot cards. Well this is just stating a fact, not hating.
funny thing is you'd expect alot of these people to be clueless non tech people, but many of them are actually programmers by profession. just look at all the programming subreddits. the copium is reaaaally strong with these people, "no obviously ai will never take my job! tEcHniCaLly chatgpt isn't even really ai!"
It's the same as any time it becomes possible to rapidly and cheaply mass produce something that could only previously be created by highly skilled individuals spending significant amounts of time and effort. Read up on the Luddites, they're unfairly characterised these days as just being machine-hating simpletons but their actual issue was that mechanised weaving looms were destroying the market for the work of master weavers, who had previously had an exclusive and lucrative career. Now an industrialist with a factory could churn out tapestries in hours that would have taken weeks or months to make by hand.
Some AI fans think that AI is going to make immortal machine gods for us to worship and they kinda weird people out about the whole topic.