Low bar for “AI”
Posted by TheRealBill 1 year, 3 months ago to Humor
Without getting into the details, I just want to make a connection here. The “expert” says that so-called AI will be generating 90% of content online.
To which I respond with “90% of everything is crap” because it pretty much is.
So if we put these two together, what they’re really saying is that they are predicting AI systems will be pouting out the crap online. 🤣
To which I respond with “90% of everything is crap” because it pretty much is.
So if we put these two together, what they’re really saying is that they are predicting AI systems will be pouting out the crap online. 🤣
ChatGPT is just a language processing tool, no more… What ChatGPT does is to demonstrate where we are going and going very fast, I had no idea that we had an AI that could understand every nuance of by job to understand a query to the level that it did. When it didn’t have the answer, it just made up stuff… Like a true liberal. LOL
The point with all of this is that we are done, Automation will rule as it will reduce costs and people will be out of work. There is no way to avoid this as a society, this stuff will get better and better in every iteration. ChatGPT can produce code now, it just doesn’t work…. Next iteration, it fixes that and then I’m done. The iteration after that, the AI self-improves, then everyone’s jobs are at jeopardy.
As you point out: sure it can assemble some code but it doesn’t work most of the time. So what good is it now? Mostly a scare tactic for some. Realistically for something like it to make a difference in programming we would need so much homogeneity and standardization on language, platform, tools, etc. because we have to remove variety to enable a fledging would-be AI to be useful that I don’t see it happening any time soon.
When it finally does happen it would have to be either a thoroughly despotic government behaving like a Stalin in terms of programming options or a large company like Apple developing one for their specific lines of products that performs so overwhelmingly better that the market rushes to that standardized walled garden because nothing else is remotely competitive and the resulting consumer market products are so overwhelming may better that nobody wants the variety because it is so much less capable.
And therin lies the iceberg in the notion: there is a huge difference between a standard library doing the core functions for you and the quality and inventiveness of the end product. We have zero evidence that computers can write and evolve better products than humans. It may be true, but so far it hasn’t remotely happened. Frankly I don’t think we as humans have matured programming-wise enough to produce code that can do that.
Oh.... right. This is Microsoft we're talking about.