ChatGPT lies then gaslights reporter with fake transcript

[Jfdlsjfd]

maybe i'll start a thread called "look how this human screwed up"

This would have the exact same informational quality as this thread.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Quite the contrary, with the advent of AI, low quality and stingy customers went mostly away. Artists didn't have to keep screening for cheapskates and problem customers because they started self selecting out.

Nice to know. So, one of the great point of image-generating AI is that it is doing good for the commissionned art market. I'll quote you on that in the future. I'm glad for artists that all the naysayers about AI taking jobs were wrong. I still feel job replacement will happen at some point, but I am glad it isn't happening yet for them as I understand that my views about a society freeed from the buden of having to work being an utopia isn't shared by all.

It is logical that a segmentation of the market between those satisfied with AI offering (a certain combination of quality, price, and quickness of execution) wouldn't be on the market for having a human-made illustration matching this offering. By satisfying the need of a lot of customers, those that you call "low quality and stingy" because insulting AI consumers is certainly adding to the smartness of your post and lending credence to your argument, it made easier for the demand for non-AI offering to meet the offer in a less than ideal market.

 

[trappedslider]

I was speaking generally and you yourself stated previously that you felt that you had to defend AI all the time. This discussion started as a reaction to the video about an AI "hallucinating" which told me that the discussion should be about AI's "hallucinating" and the problems that can result from this. That is, the discussion was to be about the cons of AI, not the pros.

We already have a discussion that's only negative about AI SkyNet really is ... here?

 

[trappedslider]

This would have the exact same informational quality as this thread.

but funnier

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

but funnier

Especially when it comes to the part where we fire the goofing human, which we can't do to AI because it has no life to be ruined, and, as people not against AI, we are necessarily enjoying ruining other's lives as part of our intrinsic evilness of character. Should I pour you another glass of baby blood?

 

[Kromanjon]

We already have a discussion that's only negative about AI SkyNet really is ... here?

So start two new discussions. I'll disengage from this after this post as even this is derailing the conversation even further.

Your mission (should you choose to accept it): Find a video about the benefits of AI on humanity and make a new thread adding, of course, your own take. Sadly, this will probably get derailed by all us nay-sayers, but I give you my promise that I won't be the one doing it.

 

[Older Beholder]

How much of this thread have you read??

"Love is the most beautiful of dreams and the worst of nightmares," to quote Van Gogh. It is possible to both love something and fear it at the same time.

I’m not sure that’s a Van Gogh quote?
Also, my reading of the quote is that it’s saying the concept of love can be both a blessing and a curse. Not that a thing you love can be both good and bad. I grant you, it’s a small distinction.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I was speaking generally and you yourself stated previously that you felt that you had to defend AI all the time. This discussion started as a reaction to the video about an AI "hallucinating" which told me that the discussion should be about AI's "hallucinating" and the problems that can result from this. That is, the discussion was to be about the cons of AI, not the pros.

It's a video saying, with a lot of emphasis and storytelling, how the reporter discovered that AI hallucinations are a thing, proceed to illustrate it to its co-host who seem to discover warm water as well as him, leading to the conclusion that it will change our lives and workplace but we need to be careful, accompanied by a commentary saying : "AI slop do exist, this is one of the examples".

This isn't a thread about the evil of AI in general: it ends with the reporter implying he'll keep using it (possibly more carefully than before and maybe he'll be educating himself on how to use the tool to lessen occurences of AI errors -- one he had obviously no trouble detecting and correcting despite his professed total ignorance of the topic). A video about the evil of AI would end with a warning like: "do not use it". I agree that the storytelling about the information is certainly pointing to a message like "look, AI is baaaaad" in a click-baity way, but that's reporting nowadays.

The accompanying commentary "here is a single example of AI slop" proves that AI hallucinations exist, which is probably denied by noone. It isn't implying this is a (-) thread on AI, but a discussion about AI hallucinations, in which an opinion like "sure they exist, but their prevalence is uncommon enough given adequate precaution that AI is still making a significant value offering for specific uses" sounds perfectly adequate.

If I were posting an illustration of using a skill challenge in my D&D game where it went badly, and concluding that skill challenge is certainly a part of the popular rules but it's not great all the time, wouldn't you think that someone saying "my experience with skill challenge is overall better than yours and despite the flaw you experimented, it's nonetheless a good mechanics" on topic?

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I’m not sure that’s a Van Gogh quote?

I am skeptical as well.

 

[trappedslider]

I’m not sure that’s a Van Gogh quote?
Also, my reading of the quote is that it’s saying the concept of love can be both a blessing and a curse. Not that a thing you love can be both good and bad. I grant you, it’s a small distinction.

I am skeptical as well.

“Love is the most beautiful of dreams and the worst of nightmares.”​

― Aman Jassal, Rainbow - the shades of love

is what Goodreads says