/c/fuckai has two dozen mods but ironically only time I’ve ever seen them take action on anyone was when they removed my post asking for recs for a community with more active moderation (lol)
I’d like to discuss generative AI from a highly skeptical perspective but with higher standards of quality and without all the mouth-frothy raging and bad memes of /c/fuckai.
Does anywhere else like that exist on the fediverse? I don’t care if it’s small/underutilized. And no I’m not interested in creating it myself.
Your quest is flawed from the outset.
You should be looking for a community to honestly and openly discuss AI, not one with a prescribed viewpoint from the outset.
The fuckai and fuckcars and fuckwhateverelse communities can be satisfying but they are fundamentally biased, and tend to reinforce self righteous viewpoints that are emotionally satisfying in the short term, but reductively mischaracterize the situation and motives involved to the point that it leaves people with an angry, hollow, and unsatisfying perspective on the world.
There isn’t a way to talk with AI zelots in a positive way.
AI may not be a totally useless tool, but any implementation so far has been detrimental to human societies in every measurable way.
It’s not possible to support AI currently if you don’t agree with the effects it has on society.
So it’s better to try to increase resistance to it in any way possible, including not being willing to concede anything to zelots who don’t give a fuck how it breaks the world.
So in your mind there is no middle ground people who feel somewhere between “AI boosting zealot” and “fuck AI it’s terrible in literally every single way”?
If you honestly believe that then you’ve already spent too much time with simple minded communities that only deal in absolutes.
Sweeping broad statements like this are almost always incredibly easy to disprove. If you’re talking about AI technology in general, of which LLMs are just one facet, then you can look at the protein structure work of Deep Mind which has literally revolutionized biomedical engineering by predicting the protein structures for hundreds of thousands of proteins, whereas previously predicting the structure of a single one would take a full research PhD.
Even if you’re just talking LLMs there are a myriad of benefits from them being integrated into assistive technology, note taking for medical professionals, improved translation and transcription engines etc.
You can look for a community of ostriches who yell ‘nah nah nah’ while burying their heads in the sand, but you’re not making a difference, you’re just a bunch of birds ineffectively yelling at each other while blinding themselves to reality.
There’s no middle ground for these people.
It’s like trying to meet Nazis half way, it only helps them.
There is no “convincing them to submit to reason” they have an invalid ideology and are only interested in forcing it on others.
Based on my experience with spaces for discussing and arguing about AI, there is a huge amount of middle ground in peoples opinions between unconditional rejection of the technology and complete denial of every problem or threat that could be associated with it. There’s also many different perspectives about what solutions to those problems are a good idea or not.
There is not anything like ideological unity. Someone who is supportive of AI for anti copyright reasons is usually going to have a lot of differences of opinion with someone who thinks AI powered surveillance will solve society’s problems by eliminating crime. Someone who wants strong government crackdowns on AI because they think Eliezer is right that a superintelligence will form and kill us all will disagree in many ways with someone who thinks the technology is largely a scam. This is a new thing that’s causing rapid changes, so people are going to have different ideas about it.
The only thing as bad as AI zealots are anti-AI zealots.
I’d like to see a source on that, and even if you have sources, I’d like to see if this fact holds true as this brand-new technology that is inarguably being exploited and misused continues to mature over the next decade. It’s possible to have nuanced opinions on technology, it won’t make you a better or worse person, just better informed.
We have to stop being dogmatic. All of us.
It has anecdotally had a measurable detrimental effect on my own life in that the executive board of my company has promised it to our customers without even knowing wtf it means
Because you’re an anti-AI zealot unwilling to hear the other side so every conversation devolves into uselessness. You don’t want to have a discussion, you just want people to agree with you.
Exactly what the OP you responded to is saying.
I prefer the term “anti genocide”
Don’t worry, you will pretend you were always against genocide after this is over and Netanyahu is executed.
Go eat a bag of dicks. Trying to shove that bullshit into what I said. You’re not even a good troll, just an asshole.
I do not consider critical thinking skills to be a “viewpoint”. I consider them a requirement for intelligent conversation.
You’re not thinking critically when you start from a conclusion. That’s the opposite of critical thinking. That’s literally just continuing to believe and not question something.
If you don’t want honest advice then ask an AI for an answer, they’re programmed to butter you up and reinforce your bubble.
Agreed
Agreed
Agreed