• Etterra@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    If AI was that capable then using human workers would eventually become cost prohibitive. If we’re still stuck having to work to live under a capitalist system by then, there’s gonna be serious problems. A post-labor economy doesn’t need to charge for even a modestly comfortable standard of living, and the overwhelming majority of people will go looking for things to do no matter how many politicians swear otherwise.

  • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’m more interested if it can have empathy and give it something like a soul. Mostly so we don’t get murdered.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    A PhD makes a person knowledgeable, not intelligent. And GPT-4 was already extremely knowledgeable.

  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Which GPT will take my job? I would imagine it’s only a year out, at the most.

    Then what? I leave my tech job and go find menial labor?

    Fuck our government for not laying down rules on this. I knew it would happen, but goddamn…

    • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Not meant as an insult, but if you really think that, you aren’t really great at that “tech job”. But you’re still better than any A"I"

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      People have the wrong idea about how advanced AI has to be to take people’s jobs.

      The loom was not intelligent. It did not “understand” weaving. It still eliminated so many jobs that human society was altered forever and so significantly that we are still experiencing the effects.

      As an analogy ( not saying this is how the world will choose to go ), you do not need a self-driving car that is superior to humans in all cases in order for Uber to eliminate drivers. If the AI can handle 95% of cases, you need 5 drivers for 100 cars. They can monitor, supervise, guide, and fully take over when required.

      Many fields will be like this. I do not need an AI with human level intelligence to get rid of the Marcom dept. I need one really skilled person to drive 6 people’s worth of output using AI. How many content creators and headline writers do I need to staff an online “news” room? The lack of person number two may surprise you.

      Getting rid of jobs is not just a one for one replacement of every individual with a machine. It is a systemic reduction in demand. It is a shifting of geographic dependence.

      Many of the tasks we all do are less novel and high-quality than we think they are. Many of us can be “largely” replaced and that is all it takes. We may not lose our jobs but there will certainly be many fewer new jobs in certain areas than there would have been.

      • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        To add to your comment, there’s also the corp’s willingness to make things more precarious, as long as it gets cheaper to run and people keep consuming, so the situation might be even worse. In your uber example, they could simply not care for the 5%, stop providing them the service and go full self-driving.

    • expr@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      sigh

      I’m so tired of repeating this ad nauseum. No, it’s not going to take your job. It’s hype train bullshit full of grifters. There is no intelligence or understanding, nor have we come anywhere close to achieving that. That is still entirely within the realm of science fiction.

      • LeFantome@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        ChatGPT is already taking people’s jobs. You overestimate the complexity of what some people get paid for.

        GenerativeAI cannot do anything on its own. However, it is a productivity amplifier in the right hands. What those “more productive” people do is reduce the demand for other labour.

        Chatbots are performing marketing communication, marketing automation, cloud engineering, simple coding, recruitment screening, tech support, security monitoring, editorial content and news, compliance verification, lead development, accounting, investor relations, visual design, tax preparation, curriculum development, management consulting, legal research, and more. Should it be? Many ( I am guessing you ) would argue no. Is it though? Absolutely.

        All of the above is happening now. This train is going to accelerate before it hits equilibrium. The value of human contribution is shifting but not coming back to where it was.

        Jobs will be created. Jobs are absolutely being lost.

        You are correct that ChatGPT is not intelligent. You are right that it does not “understand” anything. What does that have to do with taking people’s jobs? There are many, many jobs where intelligence and understanding are under-utilized or even discouraged. Boiler-plate content creation is more common than you think.

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      If she wants it to. At some point, all the chat bots are going to be given bodies. We all know it.

  • Matriks404@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    What a bunch of bullshit. I’ve asked ChatGPT recently to do a morphological analysis of some Native American language’s very simple sentences, and it gave absolute nonsense as an answer.

    And let’s be clear: It was an elementary linguistics task. Something that I did learn to do on my own by just doing a free course online.

    • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yesterday, I asked it to help me create a DAX measure for an Excel pivot table. The answers it gave were completely wrong. Each time, I would tell it the error that Excel was displaying and it would respond with “Sorry about that. You can’t use that function there for [x] reasons.”

      So it knows the reason why a combination of DAX functions won’t work but recommends them anyways. That’s real fucking useful.

  • jas0n@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    All aboard the hype train! We need to stop using the term “AI” for advanced auto complete. There is not even a shred of intelligence in this. I know many of the people here already know this, but how do we get this message to journalists?! The amount of hype being repeated by respectable journalists is sickening.

    • The Bard in Green@lemmy.starlightkel.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      I know many of the people here already know this, but how do we get this message to journalists?!

      Journalists have this information, but articles about it probably generate 10% of the clicks, shares and eyeballs->ad revenue that either the hype or the scaremongering does.

    • Ashen44@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      4 days ago

      people have been calling literal pathfinding algorithms in video games AI for decades. This is what AI is now and I think it’s going to be significantly easier to just accept this and clarify when talking about actual intelligence than trying to fight the already established language.

      • jas0n@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        While you’re not wrong, I don’t ever recall people en masse believing a game AI was truly intelligent. Everyone was always aware of the truth. There just isn’t a great name for the computer players. I think it’s an important distinction here because people do believe ChatGPT is intelligent.

    • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 days ago

      You know the Chineese? They talk about this ChatPT 7. But we Americans. My uncle, very smart man. Smartest in every room except on Thanks Giving. I always had Thanks Giving and my Turkey, everyone loved my Turkey. He said we will soon have Chat 8 and the Chineese they know nothing like it.

    • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      I believe guardian of galaxy 3 did a take of that. Rocket was special because he innovated while the others just mimiced.

    • lad@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      You are correct, but there’s a larger problem with intelligence, we don’t have a practical definition, and we keep shifting the goalpost. Then there’s always a question of a philosophical zombie, if someone acts as a human and has a human body you won’t be able to tell apart if they don’t really have intelligence, so we only need to put LLM into humanlike body (it’s not so, but you get the point)

      reminds me of this, although the comic is on a different matter

      https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2014-11-25

  • Zloubida@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    The fact that I have a PhD while I knew that I wouldn’t use it quickly after I begun, thus loosing years of my life is the proof that I’m dumb as a rock. Fitting for ChatGPT.

  • sassypablo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    Oh… that’s the same person (in the image at least) who said “Yeah AI is going to take those creative jobs, but those jobs maybe shouldn’t have existed in the first place”.