cR0w   🏴‍☠️Mar 17
I understand not being an absolutist against all things AI. It's wrong, but I understand. What I don't understand is people who think that those of us avoiding shit with AI or created by AI are irrational or some other offensive term. I don't see how it's different than avoiding code written by a literal honey badger. Neither the honey badger nor the AI know how to code and having them do so shows a lack of fucks given for the quality of the output. That's ( part of ) why we avoid it.
Show threadfelix (grayscale) 🐺
@cR0w yea, LLMs are indistinguishable from malicious genies https://felix.dognebula.com/art/malicious-genie.html
LLMs are indistinguishable from malicious genies

If your AI agent doesn't need human-like rights, then it doesn't have human-like intentions. It might be 'creative', but it isn't *conscientiously* creative. And that makes it indistinguishable from a malicious genie. 1300 words - 6.5 minutes

Mar 17 at 8:49pmPhanpy
Show threadcR0w   🏴‍☠️Mar 17
@gray17 That's a fun read. Thanks.
Show threadNick W.Mar 17

@gray17

I dissent with your exposition and analysis of the two AI's — one an ordinary AI and the other an evil genie AI. I dissent because AI doesn't realistically operate in this manner, since one AI does not have that innate ability to leapfrog or supercede the commands of another directly through the same chat window.

Of course a person using the right tools could design a unique interface or specialized method to operate in this way. The question is why would anybody do that? Using only modern C.S. vernacular: it is always about what and why with computer science.

Oh, I found your link from @ cr0w's page and didn't feel like cross-posting. I personally cannot stand AI right now. It is both an encumbrance and it steals entry-level jobs. In their eyes we are never good enough as contributors. Those systems appropriate all the best parts of our abilities and give little to nothing in return when we provide the inputs. This is only my opinion; so don't murder me online.