Lots of people on Lemmy really dislike AI’s current implementations and use cases.

I’m trying to understand what people would want to be happening right now.

Destroy gen AI? Implement laws? Hoping all companies use it for altruistic purposes to help all of mankind?

Thanks for the discourse. Please keep it civil, but happy to be your punching bag.

  • nimpnin
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah but that’s not what we are expecting people to do.

    In our extremely complicated world, most thinking relies on trusting sources. You can’t independently study and derive most things.

    Otherwise everybody should do their own research about vaccines. But the reasonable thing is to trust a lot of other, more knowledgeable people.

    • Soleos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      My comment doesn’t suggest people have to run their own research study or develop their own treatise on every topic. It suggests people have make a conscious choice, preferably with reasonable judgment, about which sources to trust and to develop a lay understanding of the argument or conclusion they’re repeating. Otherwise you end up with people on the left and right reflexively saying “communism bad” or “capitalism bad” because their social media environment repeats it a lot, but they’d be hard pressed to give even a loosly representative definition of either.

      • nimpnin
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        This has very little to do with the criticism given by the first commenter. And you can use AI and do this, they are not in any way exclusive.

        • Soleos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          This has very little to do with the criticism given by the first commenter.

          How do? What would your alternative assertion be on the topic?

          • nimpnin
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            think for themselves and create for themselves without leaning on a glorified Markov chain

            If you think your comment and this are the same thing, then I don’t know what to say.

            • Soleos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 hours ago

              Well you didn’t respond to my questions and you’re vaguely referencing our other comments instead. It’s not effective communication and leads me to think you didn’t understand my comments. You seem to be into math, so I’ll put it this way,

              Be explicit, show your work: premises–>arguments–>conclusion

              • nimpnin
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 hours ago

                Well I first replied to that first comment. Then people started making completely different claims and the point got lost in the sauce.

                Edit: why should I take the time to formulate my thoughts well if you have demonstrated that you don’t give even the slightest hint of good faith to understand what I’m saying?

                • Soleos@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  Ah, I haven’t looked at others’ responses. I can see how responding to many different people gets messy.

                  But to answer your question, because I took the time to formulate my thoughts for you, and I responded directly to things you said in your comments. I also asked you directly “How so? What’s your alternative assertion.” Which was a good faith attempt to better understand what you meant.