The thuggish will not use or misuse AI, but the brilliant & evil will quickly become adept at creating false videos of their enemies committing crimes. How are ordinary users of the Internet to distinguish real from fake?
I have long said that the record companies feared cassettes/DAT/CD burners/peer-to-peer not so much for people copying records, but people recording and distributing their own recordings without their involvement.
Yes, they had a lovely walled garden where they could charge much more than the content was really worth and limit the supply of content. All the changes didn't so much open the gates they were keeping as it just ignored the walled garden.
I take your point, up to a point. The issue I see with LLM use is more the way in which it’s used than the usage per se. If analysis and thinking are outsourced (and I do see real-world examples of that every day), then it will eventually become a problem.
That said, resistance and reversal do happen. The thoughtful and (to me) enjoyable movie “Her” was a good illustration. Theodore Twombly is employed to write letters on behalf of others - the human touch still being valued - and while Samantha the “AI” is sympathetically portrayed in many ways, it’s personal human interaction which the human characters crave. So, not apocalyptic and we do still have choices.
The issue of “Luddism” is another matter. It’s commonly misconceived that the Luddites were against technology. They don’t appear to have been so: rather, they fought the loss of livelihood (by the debasement of their skilled labour) precipitated by automation - and the resulting starvation of their children. Their resentment of machinery was driven by the effects on their lives, not by abstract principles.
When LLMs are found to be efficient, cheap and tireless, and precise like 19th century manufacturing automation, and if “knowledge-heavy” roles in law, translation, coding, HR, etc., are outsourced to them, then we’ll probably be better placed to decide how much we’ve overreacted after human teams are “thinned out”. Or, I grant you, maybe not. I’d like to be pleasantly surprised.
(For the record, I passed on the Corona but did have a dram - a very pleasant Ardbeg. Slàinte.)
Of course there are people that outsource their analysis and thinking to AI. But that is nothing new; they just went from outsourcing it to The Media or Politicians or Pundits or their neighbor, Joe, to the AI. Human nature doesn't change.
Her is an interesting movie that explores the issues we are encountering and will continue to encounter.
I believe I was pretty clear about Luddites, but perhaps a bit too glib and one-dimensional. A whole post on the topic may be in order.
I think AI is so early in its development, capability and impact that we just don't know what will come tomorrow. But one thing is certain: it is coming whether we like it or not, just as the automobile replacing the horse and buggy was inevitable.
Thank you for a clear, cogent discussion of a subject many are disturbed/afraid of.
happy to do it …. the over the top hype on both sides of this driving me batty
The thuggish will not use or misuse AI, but the brilliant & evil will quickly become adept at creating false videos of their enemies committing crimes. How are ordinary users of the Internet to distinguish real from fake?
I have long said that the record companies feared cassettes/DAT/CD burners/peer-to-peer not so much for people copying records, but people recording and distributing their own recordings without their involvement.
Yes, they had a lovely walled garden where they could charge much more than the content was really worth and limit the supply of content. All the changes didn't so much open the gates they were keeping as it just ignored the walled garden.
I take your point, up to a point. The issue I see with LLM use is more the way in which it’s used than the usage per se. If analysis and thinking are outsourced (and I do see real-world examples of that every day), then it will eventually become a problem.
That said, resistance and reversal do happen. The thoughtful and (to me) enjoyable movie “Her” was a good illustration. Theodore Twombly is employed to write letters on behalf of others - the human touch still being valued - and while Samantha the “AI” is sympathetically portrayed in many ways, it’s personal human interaction which the human characters crave. So, not apocalyptic and we do still have choices.
The issue of “Luddism” is another matter. It’s commonly misconceived that the Luddites were against technology. They don’t appear to have been so: rather, they fought the loss of livelihood (by the debasement of their skilled labour) precipitated by automation - and the resulting starvation of their children. Their resentment of machinery was driven by the effects on their lives, not by abstract principles.
When LLMs are found to be efficient, cheap and tireless, and precise like 19th century manufacturing automation, and if “knowledge-heavy” roles in law, translation, coding, HR, etc., are outsourced to them, then we’ll probably be better placed to decide how much we’ve overreacted after human teams are “thinned out”. Or, I grant you, maybe not. I’d like to be pleasantly surprised.
(For the record, I passed on the Corona but did have a dram - a very pleasant Ardbeg. Slàinte.)
Of course there are people that outsource their analysis and thinking to AI. But that is nothing new; they just went from outsourcing it to The Media or Politicians or Pundits or their neighbor, Joe, to the AI. Human nature doesn't change.
Her is an interesting movie that explores the issues we are encountering and will continue to encounter.
I believe I was pretty clear about Luddites, but perhaps a bit too glib and one-dimensional. A whole post on the topic may be in order.
I think AI is so early in its development, capability and impact that we just don't know what will come tomorrow. But one thing is certain: it is coming whether we like it or not, just as the automobile replacing the horse and buggy was inevitable.
I like Ardbeg. Cheers.