Technology

59446 readers

3878 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

524

Most U.S. adults don't believe benefits of AI outweigh the risks, new survey finds (www.axios.com)

submitted 1 year ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to c/technology@lemmy.world

208 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The majority of U.S. adults don't believe the benefits of artificial intelligence outweigh the risks, according to a new Mitre-Harris Poll released Tuesday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lloram239@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AI won’t be creating anything new anytime soon

It already has.

The “best” art tends to require a supporting story

ChatGPT can write that. Multi-modal models that combine text generation with audio and video are months away.

AI won’t be any better

Those claims have the tendency to not age well.

You don’t question your existence because other people are smarter or better at doing things, right?

Humans aren't that much better than me and not doing the things I want to do. AI on the other side will be much better than me, as well as do exactly what I want it to do and will be a click away.

And yeah, I had numerous experience were I would question my existence when playing around with ChatGPT or StableDiffusion. Neither of them is quite good enough yet, but they are very much on a trajectory where you can see that you have zero chance of competing with them in the future, or even getting remotely close.

The fact that we got them in the first place, not from humans doing centuries of research on art and language, but by simply by throwing huge amount of training data at AI algorithm, should be enough to question your existence.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

AI writing a fictional background story about how it came up with some piece of art is not the same thing as multiple researchers telling the story of an artist. Neither of your examples are something someone couldn't do, because whoever prompted it could have done the same thing and just had not yet.

You are completely missing the point that great art is generally supported by the context of how it was made and not the end result in a vaccuum.