I see generative AI on the web the same way I see forever chemicals in the real world. The effects may not be immediately apparent but they are poisoning mankind. Those who acquired knowledge and skills in the before era will be fine, but newer generations won't have the same reference points to tell reality from fiction. They will search for "baby peacock" on Google and have no reason to believe the actual birds look any different to what they're shown. I find that sad somehow.
@Gargron I recently asked someone to teach me how to write code. He taught me some basic terms and then told me to ask Claude AI to write me whatever code I need.
@Gargron "Those who acquired knowledge and skills in the before era will be fine, but newer generations won't have the same reference points to tell reality from fiction." You are right but it is even worse: AI derives it's texts from documents originally made by humans. As students and writers use AI to make their text, the number of AI produced documents will grow, and be used for AI to learn from. In the end there will be no more original thoughts, no divergent ideas. Progress will stop.
@Gargron You will be very surprised when you see what these guys will do in just two years: they will fill the Internet with identical videos about guys that will surprise you.
@Gargron Facebook for example is rife with groups where posts are AI generated. They get thousands of interactions and likes. These posts are manipulating our emotions (how cute, how sad).
@GargronYes you can think what you want...But you can't stop the development! AI is here to stay whether you like it or not. The sooner you realize it, instead of already becoming like an old angry man. Even hospitals use AI so they can help you back to life if you should be so unfortunate as to fail something besides not being able to keep up with the times. Today, AI is used, for example, to support emergency medical personnel when assessing the risk of cardiac arrest,
@Gargron I believe the opposite; if they search for something online they will have no reason to believe that the results are any meaningful representation of reality.
Information based on reality, real photographs, video, will be monetized and there will have to be checks (e.g. Using blockchain or something?). Expert knowledge based on real experience will be much more sought after, and costly.
Once again reliable information will be out of reach for those who can't pay.
@Gargron It's already gotten to a point where you can't trust anything on the web anymore and that's absolutely fucked up. Is it a real person writing that text or even talking to you? Did someone draw that picture? Are those actual people in the video?
I actually like AI as a technology which could theoretically do a lot of good, but humanity don't have enough self control to use responsibly. First thing, literally, using it by abusing it to pollute basically everything everywhere all at once.
@Gargron Liberal freedoms most often lead to the popularity of human stupidity, the flourishing of speculations of knowledge on the path to enrichment.
And about AI accordingly:
Then such AI requests will be defended as a kind of minority cult.
@Gargron The tragedy isn’t just that AI is generating misinformation—it’s that future generations may never know the difference. In a world where fiction and reality blur, the ability to discern truth will become a lost art. When the maps are rewritten, how will anyone know they were altered?
I agree with you; it's a sad reality we're facing. The idea of future generations losing touch with reality because of pervasive technology is disheartening. The line between reality and fiction is blurring, which is unsettling. I'm concerned about its impact on their understanding of the world and ability to connect with genuine experiences. It feels like we're losing something important, and that's hard to accept.
@Gargron That's been true since we first started generating art period as a species. Placing an arbitrary line along that graph as being 'too far' verges on pedantic point sticking. One could just as easily make the same arguement for Dr. Seuss depictions of animals. Or drawings of aurich & bison on cave walls.
@Gargron I've seen arguements like yours posed at every technical evolution of the arts. The same types of commentary was made as people switched to digital formats. Heck, it was said of daguerreotype photography as it was introduced way back in the 1840's. Sorry, not buying it.
@Gargron You made the assertion, the software didn't 'make' you do it. You're having a very human feeling of displacement of your comfort zones. Your expected normatives are shifting around you. It's provoking an emotional response that has nothing to do with anything objective. It's happened many times before you and will happen many times long after we and our great grandchildren have come & gone. You can acknowledge it for what it is or pointlessly blame the software for what it isn't.
@Gargron I believe that in the future, all online content should be digitally signed with a PGP key. For example, when someone posts an article or shares an image, the attached PGP signature would verify that the content truly originates from that specific individual. This would allow platforms to automatically check the authenticity of posts and assign a trust rating to each verified user.
When I was a kid in elementary school, bored, I remember sitting at the back of the classroom where there was a set of encyclopedia, and started reading volume by volume.