No one has convinced me how it is good for the general public. It seems like it will benefit corpos and governments, to the detriment of the general public.
It’s just another thing they’ll use to fuck over the average person.
It COULD help the average person, but we’ll always fuck it up before it gets to that point.
You could build an app that teaches. Pick the curriculum, pick the tests, pick the training material for the users, and use the LLM to intermediate between your courseware and the end users.
LLM’s are generally very good at explaining specific questions they have a lot of training on, and they’re pretty good at dumbing it down when necessary.
Imagine an open-source, free college course where everyone gets as much time as they need and aren’t embarrased to ask whatever questions come to their minds in the middle of the lesson. Imagine more advanced students in a class not being held back because some slower students didn’t understand a reading assignment. It wouldn’t be hard to out teach an average community college class.
But free college that doesn’t need a shit ton of tax money? Who profits off that? we can’t possibly make that.
How about a code tool that doesn’t try to write your code for you, but watches over what you’re doing and points out possible problems, what if you strapped it on a compiler and got warnings that you have dangerous vectors left open or note where buffer overflows aren’t checked?
Reading medical images is a pretty decisive win. The machine going back behind the doctor and pointing out what it sees based on the history of thousands of patient images is not bad. Worst case the doctors get a little less good at doing it unassisted, but the machines don’t get tired and usually don’t have bad days.
The problem is capitalism. You can’t have anything good for free because it’s worth money. And we’ve put ALL the money into the tech and investors will DEMAND returns.
Imagine an open-source, free college course where everyone gets as much time as they need and aren’t embarrased to ask whatever questions come to their minds in the middle of the lesson.
My impression of the average student today is that they lack so much curiosity, in part because of youtube short–induced ADHD, in part because chatgpt just answers all of their homework questions for them, no effort at all, that a course like this would be functionally useless.
This is not an issue of capitalism, detestable as it is: young people are using AI to offload the mental burden of learning. Removing money incentives doesn’t fix this.
I’ll say two things that I have actually found useful with ChatGPT, helping me flesh out NPCs in the tabletop RPG campaign I’m running, and diagnosing tech problems. That’s it. I’ve tried to program, have it make professional documents, search things for me, all of it sucks compared to just doing it myself. Definitely not worth poring a significant chunk of the global GDP into.
It’s more like the opposite. There’s not much evidence if it saving money or increasing productivity for companies to the extent that it covers the cost of running it where as for the general population it can be helpful with stuff like writing assistance but I bet most people use it like I do which is entertainment. ChatGPT has 800 million weekly users - people clearly are getting some value from it.
Of those 800 million, how many are paying? That number could be easily over-represented by people doing things without real value to them. I also don’t know how many of those users need professional help whether it be severe social anxiety or the people who find intimacy in a chatbot.
Like, you’re right there has to be some value to it but I just can’t see trillions of USD in value.
Entertainment value is value, my dog has value to me but is nothing but a monetary cost. It is in how I enjoy having my dog so much that I will pay the monetary cost because he is that valuable to me.
Someone downloading and using an app isn’t indicative to that app having much value to the end user.
No one has convinced me how it is good for the general public. It seems like it will benefit corpos and governments, to the detriment of the general public.
It’s just another thing they’ll use to fuck over the average person.
It COULD help the average person, but we’ll always fuck it up before it gets to that point.
You could build an app that teaches. Pick the curriculum, pick the tests, pick the training material for the users, and use the LLM to intermediate between your courseware and the end users.
LLM’s are generally very good at explaining specific questions they have a lot of training on, and they’re pretty good at dumbing it down when necessary.
Imagine an open-source, free college course where everyone gets as much time as they need and aren’t embarrased to ask whatever questions come to their minds in the middle of the lesson. Imagine more advanced students in a class not being held back because some slower students didn’t understand a reading assignment. It wouldn’t be hard to out teach an average community college class.
But free college that doesn’t need a shit ton of tax money? Who profits off that? we can’t possibly make that.
How about a code tool that doesn’t try to write your code for you, but watches over what you’re doing and points out possible problems, what if you strapped it on a compiler and got warnings that you have dangerous vectors left open or note where buffer overflows aren’t checked?
Reading medical images is a pretty decisive win. The machine going back behind the doctor and pointing out what it sees based on the history of thousands of patient images is not bad. Worst case the doctors get a little less good at doing it unassisted, but the machines don’t get tired and usually don’t have bad days.
The problem is capitalism. You can’t have anything good for free because it’s worth money. And we’ve put ALL the money into the tech and investors will DEMAND returns.
My impression of the average student today is that they lack so much curiosity, in part because of youtube short–induced ADHD, in part because chatgpt just answers all of their homework questions for them, no effort at all, that a course like this would be functionally useless.
This is not an issue of capitalism, detestable as it is: young people are using AI to offload the mental burden of learning. Removing money incentives doesn’t fix this.
It’s been a problem for a long time before AI.
I’ll say two things that I have actually found useful with ChatGPT, helping me flesh out NPCs in the tabletop RPG campaign I’m running, and diagnosing tech problems. That’s it. I’ve tried to program, have it make professional documents, search things for me, all of it sucks compared to just doing it myself. Definitely not worth poring a significant chunk of the global GDP into.
It’s more like the opposite. There’s not much evidence if it saving money or increasing productivity for companies to the extent that it covers the cost of running it where as for the general population it can be helpful with stuff like writing assistance but I bet most people use it like I do which is entertainment. ChatGPT has 800 million weekly users - people clearly are getting some value from it.
Of those 800 million, how many are paying? That number could be easily over-represented by people doing things without real value to them. I also don’t know how many of those users need professional help whether it be severe social anxiety or the people who find intimacy in a chatbot.
Like, you’re right there has to be some value to it but I just can’t see trillions of USD in value.
Entertainment value - not monetary. I don’t pay for an AI because it makes me money. I do it because I enjoy using it.
Entertainment value is value, my dog has value to me but is nothing but a monetary cost. It is in how I enjoy having my dog so much that I will pay the monetary cost because he is that valuable to me.
Someone downloading and using an app isn’t indicative to that app having much value to the end user.