JA WestenbergMy 9 year old and his classmates have started using “that’s AI” to mean “I don’t believe you.”
Me: we’re having dinosaur meat for dinner
Kiddo: that’s AI
Jesse McClure 
That worries me. We are raising a generation habituated to rejecting information that doesn't suit them.
Sure their bullshit detectors catch a higher proportion of the bullshit, but along with this is a higher rate of false detections.
When real data and real evidence comes out that doesn't fit their preconceived ideas, will they process it and allow it to affect their views? Or will they say "That's AI."
Might AI further enable and normalize preemptive rejection of facts?
steev hise@jmcclure @Daojoan the point is the (correct) default association of “ai” with misinformation. Which is exactly what we need. The hype around “ai” needs to be denormalized and one part of doing that is normalizing the idea that synthetic text extruders are not to be trusted. @emilymbender
Aaron@detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender Plus, the kids are exercising their bullshit detectors. We could do with a lot more skepticism.
eruwero@hosford42 @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender I also think it's problematic. Sure LLMs produce incredible amounts of bullshit but if everything that doesn't fit in your worldview becomes just "AI", that's really dangerous. And in this case it could be about bird meat, which is actually dinosaur meat, and that fact could spark the children's curiosity if it was taken seriously.
The point is AI makes it easy to dismiss basically anything because some things it produces can seem very real
I'm glad you got my point. From other replies it seems I may have expressed it poorly.
Skepticism and critical thinking are valuable and have always been around (RE: whether I feel the same about someone saying "that's crap"). But we are now engaging in activities that make people reject *everything* as fake by default. That's dangerous.
@eruwero @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender I don't see anything leading them to do that more often than is already human nature.
Calling BS "AI" is a reaction to a different problem: Being overly credulous and accepting AI slop just because it fits your worldview, while rejecting *reason* because it's too much work.
You don't see headlines about people rejecting AI and it leading to a filter-bubble and psychotic breaks. You see those headlines about people *using* AI.
@hosford42 @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender wrt the second paragraph: I think they are kind of two sides of the same coin. Being overly credulous and accepting AI slop that fits your worldview and at the same time rejecting stuff that doesn't fit your worldview and claim it's just AI, whether or not that's true. I think "AI" is really dangerous when it comes to reinforcing bias. This is independent of the example of the OP though.
I don't quite get what you mean with the last part
@hosford42 @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender also, I think calling general BS "AI" is really a sign of how normalized "AI" is, and kind of reinforces that (even if the connotation in this case is negative). This is not meant to criticize the children of course :)
@eruwero @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender I agree on this point. Unfortunately, I think it's here to stay, at least for the near term.
@eruwero @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender
Re: the last part: There have been multiple news headlines about people following AI down the proverbial rabbit hole and ending up believing some real Alice in Wonderland stuff, sometimes life-destroying. Very bad for the mental health of vulnerable folks -- the ones who forget to use their critical reasoning skills to assess truth. I can probably find some links if you're interested.
I think anybody can dismiss anything they don't like, anytime, deciding they value feeling good over being grounded in reality. I see being bullshitted from a young age as a form of inoculation against this. There is no shortcut to doing the work, looking at the evidence, and thinking things through. There will be folks who opt for the lazy way regardless, but I don't think calling BS "AI" reinforces this. BS is BS, and people have been calling it out by one name or another since the dawn of humanity.
@hosford42 @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender ok yeah, I read some of that too. If you have some good examples, feel free to share them :). The reports on people "falling in love" with "AI" are so crazy IMO, there seems to be no critical thinking involved and the presentation by journalists really plays into "AI" companies claims that their shit is actually intelligent. (I don't blame people for getting emotionally attached btw, "AI" is designed for that more or less)
@hosford42 @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender learning about BS early is great, no matter what it's called, I agree with you on that. What I was referring to is when stuff that is not actually BS, but you might think it is (because it doesn't sound plausible or you don't like it or whatever) is still claimed to be "AI". That also happens without AI, but it makes it easier to argue (to yourself or others) because it's so easy to create text or images or videos that seem very realistic
@eruwero @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender It's pure, automated sycophancy.
I'll have to come back with links later. Not feeling well ATM and my initial searches just came back with general articles about "AI psychosis" without example stories. They're definitely out there, though! Wikipedia even has a page on it now.
@hosford42 @detritus @jmcclure @Daojoan @emilymbender sure I can look it up too so no worries, that was just in case you know particularly good examples