@kristiedegaris @Jim_Graves this is a place where a nuanced view is essential. ML can scrape a ton of data and docs and find helpful links. But it's also stymied - elsewhere in this conversation it's noted that it has no expertise, and that's where it fails is customer interactions.

Sometimes customers only need help with a search. Other times they need a human with all that that entails.

@sknob

3/

Itt also props up authoritarian regimes under the banner of economic development. Psychologically, travel is sold as self actualisation and freedom, encouraging constant movement, novelty addiction, and escape rather than stability or repair, while politically it reproduces colonialist logic in which some bodies move freely across borders and others are immobilised or criminalised. And that's just to start...

@kristiedegaris
My own tests of genAI have it only helpful in areas where I possess high levels of competence, where I know if the genAI is outputting complete garbage, subtle garbage or useful material.

There are many areas of life where I don't have high competence. Using it there I would be relying on a grossly inadequate tool. Life is bad enough already.

9/

I’m not aguing for a ‘fuck it’ attitude to AI use, not at all. We need to approach this powerful technology in a considered and careful way. It needs to be heavily regulated at the policy end too. What I’m asking people to see is that it is possible act ethically within an unethical system (there are exampels everywhere!) and that if we care about ethics we must make sure that our judgement is ethical too.

END

7/

For a bit of context, a return flight from Scotland to Spain uses roughly the same amount of energy as hundreds of thousands of substantial text only AI interactions. That’s a lifetime’s worth of pretty heavy AI use. Something, somewhere in our thinking has gotten skewed. This is not to advocate for, or excuse excessive AI use, it's to ask that judgement is proportional and accurate.