When Facebook first arrived on the scene, it was just a fun place to connect with friends, play a game or two together and share photos and thoughts.
Hindsight gives us the ability now, to say it would be immensely naive to say that’s all social media is. It has fundamentally changed the way generations communicate and interact with each other, and the world around them. Humanity is hooked on devices, and social media makes up a sizeable part of the hook.
It has been hugely destructive.
Now add to the mix, the ability to falsify reality itself. What is real anymore? What is true? LLM’s are fast approaching a level of mimicry that is becoming difficult to distinguish from reality. What does that mean for truth? What does that mean for the already eroding ability for people to engage meaningfully with one another?
Young men and women are already finding themselves disillusioned with the state of the world and each other. Is it into the waiting arms of an understanding “AI” they go?
What we call “truth”, in all too many cases, has always been a construct. How much of what we hold as being true, as truth, has actually been verified by ourselves to see if they correspond to some “actual state of the affairs”. Let alone that different individuals perceive and have different concept about this “actual state of the affairs”.
Here, I am not talking about “scientific truths” something that, in this time and age, is put under question by some pursuing one or other agenda.
I don’t think that AI had anything to do with launching the idea of “Alternative Facts” inaugurating the era of “Post Truth”. People did.
Don’t get me wrong, I think your essay is thought-provoking and raises many good points. But I wanted to point out that what we call “truth” is a problematic concept.
PS. By no means do I want that this thread gets into politics. I think this thread should be kept open as the discussion about the AI is an important one to have. So please help to keep it going on.
That’s a lovely data table sweetcheeks, but you haven’t given a source for any of it. Is that because you asked ChatGPT and blindly believed what it gave you?
If you want to make a correction, you are all welcome to do that. That was a response to “ai being the biggest problem since the splitting of the atom” comment. It didn’t have to be perfect. It is Grok by the way. I like grok better. It does reasoning so much better.
It was such obvious hyperbole that it didn’t need dignifying with a response.
And you have clearly abandoned your reasoning to it. As others have pointed out, the table compares 25 years of alleged data for AI with more than 200 years of alleged data for other categories. Even if the data is correct, the table is worthless.
There are a lot of things we already blindly trust. That is not AI’s fault. That is a human error.
As i have said in my previous reply, you are free to make corrections to my input. Instead of criticizing me for it, just give me the corrected version of that table and i will modify my post with it. And i will credit you too.
Without assigning any value judgement to this statement, I suspect, that in those areas and fields of activities where AI has already shown proofs of surpassing humans’ cognitive capabilities, many humans, perhaps only for practical reasons (lack of time for example) will put their trust into the results produced by AI.
With time, when AI will get better and better at producing better and more accurate results, the trust put into them by humans will grow.
Is AI infallible? No, I don’t think it is. On the other hand, neither is any single human being.
Sorry for my lack of understanding. I thought what irony i tried to show there was obvious but it clearly wasn’t. I am not trying to acquit or justify AI in that post. I am trying to tell you and others that we as humans were already doing all the bad things and so much more without it. AI is just an extension of our human brains. It is an interface between us and the computing machine. I don’t understand why people fail to understand that. But maybe they don’t want to. Blaming AI for our mishaps has already started i see. Another good excuse for the politicians to change the agenda and the narratives and continue to do their daily exploits. Yeah, i will join the party then if that is what you want.
“AI will kill us all”.
You happy now?
I have contributed enough to this discourse and this was my last post. Have fun out there. Stay away from bad AI.
Whether or not the data is correct is irrelevant, the table does not prove the safety or otherwise of AI, because it is not comparing similar time periods. And even if you found (without the assistance of Grok) data for the first 25 years of the other categories, there would be so many health warnings about that data (how reliable is data recorded in the early 1800s, adoption of petrol engine cars was very low in the first 25 years, etc. etc.) that any such comparison would not prove very much.
I realise that you probably won’t read this, but you need to realise that copying & pasting a table provided by Grok, without the prompt, attribution, data sources or a check to see if the table provides a valid comparison, is not a good use of your time, of Grok, or of this forum.
Windows 12: How Microsoft Plans to Redefine the OS with AI, Voice, and Cloud Integration
“Microsoft is quietly shaping the future of Windows, and if early hints are anything to go by, the upcoming version — unofficially dubbed Windows 12 — will be unlike anything we’ve seen before.”
