News and What's New in AI

jwhjr17

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

benjs said:

I've used ChatGPT to successfully write complex dialect-specific SQL queries with particular end goals in mind. I've also written business and/or software specs with it, drafted MVP designs for software, and am currently using it in conjunction with a development AI tool called Warp to write two different apps. 

I feel that the output is conservatively that of a $100,000 annual salary developer, and probably at least a 2x efficiency boost to a competent developer based on the time-savings.

Critical to understand:
1. The more explicitly and specifically you can outline objectives to these tools, the more likely they are to get it right
2. It relies on a sufficient corpus of data to yield good results, so these tools are unlikely to yield good results when working with a new coding tool/concept/language
3. It is not error-proof. If you don't have a (sometimes basic, sometimes more) understanding of programming logic, results will vary
4. It is not 100% optimal. Just as above, if you can't recognize suboptimal code or propose better ways, you may end up with suboptimal app performance
5. It will not give unbiased opinions (even based on evidence). It is more likely to explain to you why you're right about something, than why you're wrong about something
6. Tools are getting better at addressing the first five points rapidly, and a developer who doesn't use these tools is already disadvantaged compared to a developer who does

I'm just beginning to try to understand AI, Ben, not as a fan nor as a detractor, but simply because it is here to stay and until the power runs out, it will eventually influence basically everything. So my question is this: If we were to define "true AI" as something that, "Exhibits a broad spectrum of cognitive abilities, comparable to human intelligence, allowing it to understand, and to reason on its own, and learn across diverse domains", is ChatGPT true AI?

Yeah, ChatGTP is true AI. It does a lot more than just answer questions. For example, I could just enter a job posting for a job I'm applying for and copy and paste my resume, and ChatGPT will create a perfect unique cover letter for me suitable only for that job, created to try and get me that interview. And that's just a really basic use for it. 

I'm fairly certain what you are talking about is not what I understand true AI to be.  If you go to the video I posted above with the conversation between Sir Stephen Fry and Yuval Hahari (well worth the half hour to watch in any case), Fry and Harari talk about how true AI can do things we cannot.  At around 6:02 Fry says, "...if it could only match what we did, it would not be a tool..." and how AI can outmatch what we can do.  ChatGPT may be able to write your resume faster than you, but you are intelligent enough to  be able to write a resume as well as ChatGPT.  

I think we are probably on the brink of, or even at, the point of true AI, but my impression is that the term "AI" gets tossed around a bit too easily.  The things we describe as AI are things that the machine does on our command.  True AI is or will be something capable of doing things without commands and (again, this is in the video) when true AI is fully functional, we will be living in a hybrid society.  The ramifications of that are fascinating at best, disturbing or even disastrous for humans at worse.  

I'm not trying to be fear mongering here, but I think if you watch the Fry/Harari video as well as this shorter one:

https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_why_ai_is_our_ultimate_test_and_greatest_invitation

you will understand that I am not (as jwhjr17 above seems to be implying) simply dear mongering.  I'm just observing what we are creating.  

@brianlux I apologize if you thought I was implying that you were fear mongering as that was not my intent. 

brianlux

jwhjr17 said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

benjs said:

I've used ChatGPT to successfully write complex dialect-specific SQL queries with particular end goals in mind. I've also written business and/or software specs with it, drafted MVP designs for software, and am currently using it in conjunction with a development AI tool called Warp to write two different apps. 

I feel that the output is conservatively that of a $100,000 annual salary developer, and probably at least a 2x efficiency boost to a competent developer based on the time-savings.

Critical to understand:
1. The more explicitly and specifically you can outline objectives to these tools, the more likely they are to get it right
2. It relies on a sufficient corpus of data to yield good results, so these tools are unlikely to yield good results when working with a new coding tool/concept/language
3. It is not error-proof. If you don't have a (sometimes basic, sometimes more) understanding of programming logic, results will vary
4. It is not 100% optimal. Just as above, if you can't recognize suboptimal code or propose better ways, you may end up with suboptimal app performance
5. It will not give unbiased opinions (even based on evidence). It is more likely to explain to you why you're right about something, than why you're wrong about something
6. Tools are getting better at addressing the first five points rapidly, and a developer who doesn't use these tools is already disadvantaged compared to a developer who does

I'm just beginning to try to understand AI, Ben, not as a fan nor as a detractor, but simply because it is here to stay and until the power runs out, it will eventually influence basically everything. So my question is this: If we were to define "true AI" as something that, "Exhibits a broad spectrum of cognitive abilities, comparable to human intelligence, allowing it to understand, and to reason on its own, and learn across diverse domains", is ChatGPT true AI?

Yeah, ChatGTP is true AI. It does a lot more than just answer questions. For example, I could just enter a job posting for a job I'm applying for and copy and paste my resume, and ChatGPT will create a perfect unique cover letter for me suitable only for that job, created to try and get me that interview. And that's just a really basic use for it. 

I'm fairly certain what you are talking about is not what I understand true AI to be.  If you go to the video I posted above with the conversation between Sir Stephen Fry and Yuval Hahari (well worth the half hour to watch in any case), Fry and Harari talk about how true AI can do things we cannot.  At around 6:02 Fry says, "...if it could only match what we did, it would not be a tool..." and how AI can outmatch what we can do.  ChatGPT may be able to write your resume faster than you, but you are intelligent enough to  be able to write a resume as well as ChatGPT.  

I think we are probably on the brink of, or even at, the point of true AI, but my impression is that the term "AI" gets tossed around a bit too easily.  The things we describe as AI are things that the machine does on our command.  True AI is or will be something capable of doing things without commands and (again, this is in the video) when true AI is fully functional, we will be living in a hybrid society.  The ramifications of that are fascinating at best, disturbing or even disastrous for humans at worse.  

I'm not trying to be fear mongering here, but I think if you watch the Fry/Harari video as well as this shorter one:

https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_why_ai_is_our_ultimate_test_and_greatest_invitation

you will understand that I am not (as jwhjr17 above seems to be implying) simply dear mongering.  I'm just observing what we are creating.  

@brianlux I apologize if you thought I was implying that you were fear mongering as that was not my intent. 

Honestly, I don't remember.  Oh the joys of aging. 

And I apologize if I misunderstood.  All's good.  Thanks for the message!  :plus_one:

Tim Simmons

seems good

Lerxst1992

Tim Simmons said:

seems good

Yep, perfectly fine today


” The year 2010 was exactly 15 years ago, since the current year is 2025.”

Lerxst1992

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

seems good

Yep, perfectly fine today


” The year 2010 was exactly 15 years ago, since the current year is 2025.”

There is also ambiguity in that famous question.


” The number of years to the decimal point between January 2, 2025, and December 31, 2010, is approximately 14.007 years.”




there ya go Tim. AI wins.

mickeyrat

gimmesometruth27

i am seeing that a lot of social media groups are now banning ai posts. it is a start, but not enough.

Lerxst1992

gimmesometruth27 said:

i am seeing that a lot of social media groups are now banning ai posts. it is a start, but not enough.

What do you hope that accomplishes?

brianlux

gimmesometruth27 said:

i am seeing that a lot of social media groups are now banning ai posts. it is a start, but not enough.

Good to know.

But then there's Facebook.  I can't prove it, but I do believe there are the occasional posts on Facebook that are made by real people and not AI.    

bootlegger10

Say only good things about AI in your posts.  You will be glad you did about a decade from now.  AI going to cancel your ass. Ha.  

brianlux

bootlegger10 said:

Say only good things about AI in your posts.  You will be glad you did about a decade from now.  AI going to cancel your ass. Ha.  

If AI gets that touchy, and/or if AI starts to analyze the general overall integrity of humanity, we can all kiss our asses goodbye.  Human annihilation bu AI is definitely not out of the question. And I'll be grateful if we have another 10 years!

Kat

brianlux said:

bootlegger10 said:

Say only good things about AI in your posts.  You will be glad you did about a decade from now.  AI going to cancel your ass. Ha.  

If AI gets that touchy, and/or if AI starts to analyze the general overall integrity of humanity, we can all kiss our asses goodbye.  Human annihilation bu AI is definitely not out of the question. And I'll be grateful if we have another 10 years!

I'm thinking that every advancement with Ai puts us that much closer to Skynet. 

mace1229

Tim Simmons said:

seems good

I haven't checked this thread in a while, I just saw this.
This must have been a popular thing going around, as all I typed was "was 2010" and it autofilled the rest of the question. And got it right this time.

As a teacher, I hate AI. It's making cheating so easy and rampant. Homework is almost pointless. Kids can take a picture of an assignment and it's done for them. We've had to switch back to paper tests because google lens was too easy to use and doesn't show up on any of our trackers. It was also freaky accurate for complicated word problems that involves graphs and data tables. 

gimmesometruth27

mace1229 said:

Tim Simmons said:

seems good

I haven't checked this thread in a while, I just saw this.
This must have been a popular thing going around, as all I typed was "was 2010" and it autofilled the rest of the question. And got it right this time.

As a teacher, I hate AI. It's making cheating so easy and rampant. Homework is almost pointless. Kids can take a picture of an assignment and it's done for them. We've had to switch back to paper tests because google lens was too easy to use and doesn't show up on any of our trackers. It was also freaky accurate for complicated word problems that involves graphs and data tables. 

if you want to make it challenging, write the questions in cursive.

gimmesometruth27

brianlux said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

i am seeing that a lot of social media groups are now banning ai posts. it is a start, but not enough.

Good to know.

But then there's Facebook.  I can't prove it, but I do believe there are the occasional posts on Facebook that are made by real people and not AI.    

it is mainly in the facebook groups that are banning the ai photos and images that people make. i find it funny that the group rules say no ai stuff, then people post ai stuff, then do another post asking why their post got deleted. 

ai is making us stupid.

Halifax2TheMax

gimmesometruth27 said:

brianlux said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

i am seeing that a lot of social media groups are now banning ai posts. it is a start, but not enough.

Good to know.

But then there's Facebook.  I can't prove it, but I do believe there are the occasional posts on Facebook that are made by real people and not AI.    

it is mainly in the facebook groups that are banning the ai photos and images that people make. i find it funny that the group rules say no ai stuff, then people post ai stuff, then do another post asking why their post got deleted. 

ai is making us stupid.

  * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

“Making”?

brianlux

Kat said:

brianlux said:

bootlegger10 said:

Say only good things about AI in your posts.  You will be glad you did about a decade from now.  AI going to cancel your ass. Ha.  

If AI gets that touchy, and/or if AI starts to analyze the general overall integrity of humanity, we can all kiss our asses goodbye.  Human annihilation bu AI is definitely not out of the question. And I'll be grateful if we have another 10 years!

I'm thinking that every advancement with Ai puts us that much closer to Skynet. 

That's a scary thought (but I'm afraid you might me right)!

brianlux

gimmesometruth27 said:

brianlux said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

i am seeing that a lot of social media groups are now banning ai posts. it is a start, but not enough.

Good to know.

But then there's Facebook.  I can't prove it, but I do believe there are the occasional posts on Facebook that are made by real people and not AI.    

it is mainly in the facebook groups that are banning the ai photos and images that people make. i find it funny that the group rules say no ai stuff, then people post ai stuff, then do another post asking why their post got deleted. 

ai is making us stupid.

Sad but true, my friend.  I have a few local friends who post images on FB that are AI (good grief, look at me that anti-acronym man using acronyms, lol) and it's a no-brainer that they are AI, but they (unwittingly, I believe) pass them off as real.  Good grief, what I can say to them?! 

mickeyrat

brianlux said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

brianlux said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

i am seeing that a lot of social media groups are now banning ai posts. it is a start, but not enough.

Good to know.

But then there's Facebook.  I can't prove it, but I do believe there are the occasional posts on Facebook that are made by real people and not AI.    

it is mainly in the facebook groups that are banning the ai photos and images that people make. i find it funny that the group rules say no ai stuff, then people post ai stuff, then do another post asking why their post got deleted. 

ai is making us stupid.

Sad but true, my friend.  I have a few local friends who post images on FB that are AI (good grief, look at me that anti-acronym man using acronyms, lol) and it's a no-brainer that they are AI, but they (unwittingly, I believe) pass them off as real.  Good grief, what I can say to them?! 

suggest they may want to look into navigating social media and discernment. 

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/digital_media_literacy_1.pdf

Lerxst1992

mace1229 said:

Tim Simmons said:

seems good

I haven't checked this thread in a while, I just saw this.
This must have been a popular thing going around, as all I typed was "was 2010" and it autofilled the rest of the question. And got it right this time.

As a teacher, I hate AI. It's making cheating so easy and rampant. Homework is almost pointless. Kids can take a picture of an assignment and it's done for them. We've had to switch back to paper tests because google lens was too easy to use and doesn't show up on any of our trackers. It was also freaky accurate for complicated word problems that involves graphs and data tables. 

Certainly AI got that question partially correct because it’s a poorly written question since it doesn’t include dates
or months . Dec  2010 to Jan 2025 is approximately 14 years.

AI is going nowhere and will only get better. Schools will need to learn how to adapt. Shorter written tests with in person Q and A perhaps. Either we figure it out or AI beats us earlier. A college near me (Adelphi) got sued by an autistic student who was punished for using AI. The student claimed to use grammarly and tutoring to make up for their communicative deficit.

And how did the college determine the student was “cheating?” AI.