politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I know this isn't the point of the article, but honestly we shouldn't be using the term "AI" either. By implying that ChatGPT et al are intelligent, even if that's not our intention, we feed into the hype. I found this article proposing alternative, more accurate terms: https://buttondown.com/maiht3k/archive/how-to-talk-about-ai-without-adding-to-the/
Probabilistic Automation is probably the best term for a majority of what the orange buffoon calls "super intelligence".
I hate that this went from "we want to detect cancer early" to "steal and monetize everything".
The tech bros have destroyed the believe everyone had about progress. These days not much people believe more inventions and technology will actually improve our lives.
Yeah, I hate how assholes like donnie are wanting to cash in. So very very much. I remain hopeful about its practical applications in many fields - and they are there, in spite of what many haters say. I hate that the focus seems to be about how many jobs we can "disrupt" or destroy based on stolen works (code, art, books). I'm so very sick of what it's doing to the IT world in which I work. Instead, it could have been mostly about trying to supercharge scientific and technology endeavors, and mostly that. Instead, the oligarchs seem to be aiming it at stealing the jobs of creatives.
We desperately need someone smart and informed on the matter with a big platform that can split the difference. People like donnie and musk ain't it but because one is in the WH and the other has too much money, we get to listen to their "thoughts" on the matter.
Good stuff
artificial intelligence → probabilistic automation
hybrid intelligence → augmented human intelligence
image recognition → image labeling
speech recognition → automatic transcription
the model shows bias → the model reflects bias
model mistakes → model errors
chatbots are good at … → chatbots are good for …
hallucination → undesirable output
goal → success condition
The first thing I broach on the topic is that there is no intelligence. It is a language model that uses an algorithm to determine speech and conversation. It is limited to whatever it has scraped from humanity and offers nothing further. Each different LLM has its own predilections and tendencies. Some better than others, but all of it is unintelligent and will confidently tell you a wrong answer. Furthermore, it devolves into hallucinations very quickly. What have I missed or what should I add?
Edit: Article correctly states LLMs should not be anthropomorphized and "hallucination" lends to that. But I feel "undesirable outputs" is too soft even though it does strip the humanity from the LLM.
I think it might make sense to call it "Augmentive Intelligence", because it is not intelligence on its own. It has major issues when it comes to reasoning on its own, but for someone who actually is intelligent, it can add to that person's ability to accomplish things. So it augments that person's intelligence, instead of being an intelligence on its own.