Letting insinuate the initiative is on robot? but in reality, you need to order or command it to brainstorm right? not to mention answering back for clarity and feedback. Opposite of cuck who have no choice in that matter ?
Gonna copy pasta one of my previous comments because it’s relevant again:
I’m going to argue that how you use the lying machine determines if it’s slop, not if you use it.
“Generate a character profile for Alexander the blacksmith.” Slop.
“Ask me questions about Alexander the blacksmith so I can further develop his character.” Not slop.
“Summarize everything I explained about Alexander the blacksmith in the format of a wiki article.” Could be slop, might not be, depends on how diligent you were about not letting the lying machine have creative control. Needs to be reviewed for accuracy of course.
And for the record, I was a DM for years before generative ai was a thing. Running a campaign is ton of work, even with shortcuts. Don’t insult your DM like this.
I was just reminded of Robot Unicorn Attack looking at this post.
Great mobile game
Why use lot thought when few thought do trick?
But like… in a bad way.
There should be a way to acknowledge two things being true at the same time, but that way was never discovered on Lemmy.
“AI is mostly bad” and “AI can be useful at times” are both true statements. You sacrifice nothing by acknowledging both, and thinking you have to pick between the two is, ironically, mentally lazy af.
Because utilitarians are amoral. In fact, the AI ethics “intellectuals” are usually utilitarians, as seen with “Longtermism” and “Effective Altruism.”
You need to realize that your stance is not going to be enough.
Are you seriously considering people on the internet should start acknowledging nuance? Smh.
I just want to be angry and right - and personally insult you; even though I know nothing about you outside of a sentence or two that I just read.
Using it as a tool to speed up your own work is completely different from passing off its work as yours or using it to do someone else’s work
Right… do you think I disagree?
Just additive
Why do they only draw the unicorns female. I’ve never seen unicorn dong.
That’s not a unicorn. It’s a whatever Pegasus is.
Why do they only draw the
pegasusespterippi female. I’veneverseenpegasuspterippi dong.Edit: s/pegasus/pterippus/, and also in researching the correct terminology I have now seen Pegasus dong. I did not want to see that.
Small dong
That is silly, because I’m pretty sure Pegasus is canonically male.
A magnificent horse, with the brain of a bird.
Doubt
That’s because you’re unattractive to unicorns.
This hurt my self esteem more than I ever expected it could
:(
if you’d like to change that, e621 has tons of examples.
Oh my. You weren’t kidding. I searched unicorn and yeah, teems of examples.
Also interesting...
Lots of examples of furry art with equine-anatomically-correct dong. Animal genitals on anthos is a common red line for platforms that are furry-tolerant but not furry-friendly.
I fucking love e621, almost anything is allowed, and if you don’t want to see something then just put that tag in your blocklist. The tagging system is robust as fuck, and bad tagging (like you’d see on literally every other platform) is socially unacceptable.
Right but, I’m not trying to be rude but, the anatomy on this is off. The right wing is not right. So, it’s kind of an…interesting example to use.
I didn’t go through 8 years of grueling computer science and engineering education to ask an AI to do my fucking job.
Okay but have you considered I don’t care how I get my job done as long as the paycheck keeps coming.
as the paycheck keeps coming.
How are you not comprehending yet that the reason investors are investing in those datacenters and models is because the shared business goal is to eliminate jobs for humans (so they can get all the profit of the business)??
Okay but have you considered the brain is a muscle that needs exercise to stay healthy and functional and offloading “thinking” makes your brain weaker?
have you considered the brain is a muscle
Kinda undermines your point when you start with a completely untrue statement.
It’s a metaphor
Okay but have you considered I only apply my brain to fun and exciting problems, and the ones at work get the clanker?
Yeah fuck the planet!
Just like you use the rest of your muscles only for fun and exciting tasks.
wanking, naturally
You use your brain at work? Ppffff. Overachiever.
Yeah, why would I train my brain repeatedly, for the majority of my life to ponder on and create almost exclusively on corporate bullshit that enriches other people? I’m thinking the bare minimum at work and getting my brain work maximized on my days and hours off. I’m not conditioning that fucker to be an office drone, I’m conditioning it to be a fireman astronaut inventor artist dog walker like 5 year old me wanted.
I say this about anything with a motor in it. My muscles are muscles that need exercise to stay healthy and functional, offloading “work” makes my gainz weaker.
Do you tell yourself that as you get out your compass and paper maps on the way to a new city.
Land navigation is an important skill. You wouldn’t let such an important skill atrophy would you?
Honestly, navigation is an insanely satisfying skill to work on. Navigation without GPS fills an instinctual bucket that makes no sense to me. Letting it atrophy is a big failure in becoming a functioning adult imo.
I actually agree, I just feel it’s the same hyperbolic argument every time a new technology makes something else (situationally) obsolete.
Knowing how live off the land was once common. It can still be useful. It is even fun for some (to learn, if not do). Yet… Here we are with a vast majority of our population devoid of those skills. It will keep happening.
This is complicated by the fact that to gain advantage (or just maintain relevance) in a complex and changing society, you need to be learning the new skills that leverage new technology. Yet systems become more complex, specialized roles are needed, and we simply can’t learn it all.
Enter the database of all information and a technology capable of quickly searching and extracting information with relevant context. Learn to use it to your advantage, or don’t…
I think its more, roles that didn’t need specialty skills are being removed by a very dumb tool that dumb people think is amazing. It seems amazing if you dont understand the thing you are asking it to do.
Living off the land is a great example. I grow ~10% of my food in a large garden, mostly tomatos, apples, pears, and peppers. Most people dont know how hard and specialized it is to do this. When we lost power for a week 2 years ago, we were totally fine. Provided food to our neighbors, no issues. Because of our time spent learning how to grow and preserve food.
I’d argue allowing the offloading of the simple specializations AI can handle makes an overall more useless person.
I have a small garden, know how to grow crops, and grow hydroponics as a hobby (I have off grid solar, battery back up, and could upscale operation if needed).
So I do get where you’re coming from.
I also have an offline information repository and off line local LLM that could help someone (with less skills than me) maintain/upscale or build a similar system, as well as provide many other skill sets I don’t have or am less competent in.
So the technology is useful to those who know how to use it.
(I have a strong science and medical skill set, and a hobby level skill set for network/computer science, electrical work, and gardening… So ymmv. Point being, I use all tools and skills available, and if something happens to me, the LLM is better than nothing for those that don’t, and can greatly accelerate learning new skills if used correctly, even a relatively stupid open weights model is like a super search engine that can translate language (and tech speak to normy).
It’s one of those things I know is hard to explain. Similar to the covid pandemic, I kept saying “I want to read the papers 10 years in the future”. I want to know what happens after the hype and actual science of the impact something has becomes available.
I’m extremely skeptical that a tool that offloads basic critical thought and brainstorming will be good for society as a whole. I use it sparingly, but it usually wastes my time. Except for summarizing things it is good at that.
I think it will collapse into normalcy in a few years, and it will be moderately useful. The stealing it does is also a major problem.
As a strange example, I asked Gemini a question similar to my published thesis. It stole directly from my these with no attributions.
it’s not atrophy if it never existed.
True. I forgot I’m old and know how to use maps.
This seems more like a labour alienation problem than a laziness problem to me.
Of course, that’s why I sum my spreadsheets by hand with pen and paper and then enter the total back into the sheet
You jest but I’ve seen people do this because they didn’t want to use their brain to discover the most basic functions of excel
Using software versus typing in “do the whole thing for me” has some differences, maybe a little nuance is an important thing here. Maybe…
Exercise yes. Daily 8hr forced deathmarch, not so much.
The brain is a muscle… really? I wonder where you heard that. Probably a person. Maybe you should fact check that with AI next time.
Noone says that asking a person a question is offloading their thinking. But if you ask AI it is? How does that work?
This is something I’m currently struggling with at a new job. The product they’ve crafted is fundamentally linked to AI, insomuch as I literally can’t get the data without prompting.
I’m doing my best to “do difficult things” outside of work to compensate, and I can only hope that’s enough
I recommend getting into Cryptic Crosswords. They give me my cogitation fix. The Youtube channel Cracking The Cryptic has a great masterclass series to get into them, and Minute Cryptic is a good way to dip your toe into the hobby.
It’s funny you say that. It was while doing a regular crossword that just for a millisecond I thought to myself, “Hey I bet Claude could answer that”, that I felt such disgust.
You could always write a CLI for that.
I’d rather have someone tell me that they’re literally into shit than that they’re an AI “artist”
Is that artist in the room with us?
I’m alright with that, as long as I can wear a chicken costume.
Baby Brent?
You brainstorm with the robot. Like you brainstorm with a rubber duck.
The rubber duck doesn’t feed back anything that might affect how you think. It’s more like brainstorming with someone who is both sycophantic and has their own (unthought-though) ideas about how you should do it. At best it’s a waste of tokens because a rubber duck would have worked, at worst it directs your thought process rather than letting you think.
Are you so easily manipulated or why do you think that is always the case?
Everything has the potential of influencing how you think, it is on you how you let that affect you.
LMs also work for that. If there is somebody who just accepts everything the software puts out, that is a problem with the person.
Critical thinking should always be applied no matter where information comes from. But I guess critical thinking is on the downtrend, measured by the amount of people spinning up one scenario in their head, arguing based on just that while ignoring every other possible conclusions.
Brainstorming solo versus brainstorming in a group are very different activities. Your assertion was that brainstorming with an LLM, which feeds back more-or-less like another participant, was the same as brainstorming with a rubber duck, i.e. solo, which it is not.
Brainstorming solo is an exercise in fully exploring your understanding of a subject, and developing new insights or approaches to it. Brainstorming as a group is more about finding a consensus solution or approach. Doing so with an LLM is much closer to the latter, however your “partner” has no actual experience but still presents feedback as though it did, and, critically, has an inbuilt tendancy to confirm your biases. Thinking of that like either solo or group brainstorming will automatically warp your thought processes by encouraging you to stay on certain tracks.
In all fairness I was referring to the op which stated you let the LM brainstorm “for you”. I wanted to get the point across that you can also talk to it like you would to a rubber duck.
But i agree with you that there is a difference between talking to an LM and talking to a rubber duck forvtge reasons you described. It’s its own thing.
But I disagree with your view on brainstorming. I mean when you say it is an exercise in exploring your understanding… Well it can be but this is not all it can be.
When I brainstorm for a project I have an idea but not necessarily all knowledge about all the things I need/want for it. So it can help to gather reference points, technology that fits the project, etc.
And the encouraging to stay on certain track is also true but can be a good thing.
it’s brainstorming with a rubber duck that has the word “yes” written on it
Not really and not always. I had a question about a law that seemingly changed recently. ChatGPT absolutely refused to agree with me that “$X is now legal”. It gave me several sources for more information and examples of government speech on the subject, but just for fun I pushed it to agree with me. Couldn’t make that happen.
meh, that’s just a removable layer on top. the uncensored models are sycophantic as all getout. they have to actively work against that in the frontend.
So when I brainstorm with a person, they are never confidently wrong? And they never have their own ideas on how I should do it.
Does that person have billions of dollars and power over all political leaders to sway a country toward totalitarianism ? No? Thats the difference.
When brainstorming with an AI, you aren’t brainstorming with their CEO. Even Grok can’t do that, no matter how much they try. Amd that is why people don’t use grok. They do have some influence over what the AI says… but they also influence people with news and ads. So both the person and the AI are being influenced by billionaires and companies. The person by many many more actually.
The assertion was the brainstorming with an LLM was like brainstorming with a rubber duck. It is not, as I’ve outlined in another comment.
Brainstorming with another person can also lead to biases, you’re correct, but your partner is less likely to just agree with your ideas, or to have built in biases that you’re not aware of.
Hard agree. And, uh, disagree.
A handful of employees in a conference room are more likely to just agree. Those same employees will be less agreeable on video, and even less so in the company chat. People will consciously or unconsciously hide their biases in most contexts.
A handful of employees in a conference room are more likely to just agree.
I see you’ve never met my coworkers before! The politest way to describe that sort of gathering would be “a free and frank exchange of opinions”. I quite like them for that. The point is that I know their biases already, so I can adjust for them, and I can be confident that they’re actually trying to achieve the same thing I am, rather than regurgitating a probabilistically derived sequence of tokens that strongly resemble, but aren’t, actual thought.
The biases I’m talking about here are usually more along the lines of preferred approaches to problems, general pessimism or optimism in outlook, and any “oneupmanship” that is known to occur, rather than anything people tend to hide.
I will give you that on average, a human partner is less likely to agree. But there are plenty who will just agree with everything you say. So as humans, we evaluate what kind of partner we have, and treat their feedback accordingly. It’s the same with AI. You could of course tell AI not to be that way if you want.
A rubber duck doesn’t lie to you and stroke your ego off
A robot doesn’t lie either because lying needs intent. And if a rubber duck doesn’t stroke you ego, well that’s just a bad rubber duck.
Bingo! Brainstorming is the one thing LLMs excel at. I also use ChatGPT for find words or terms I’ve forgotten or don’t know. Just found “availability heuristic” this morning. (It’s the reason the internet has ruined our perceptions of risk.)
Could we get the message across without the kink-shaming?
No. There are way too many kinks and it becomes a constraint on discourse.
That completely disregards the humiliation fetishists. Way to kink shame.
No. It is required. (seriously, why is everything being shoe-horned into “kink shaming”?)
Why is everyone being shoe-horned into defending this post in any respect?
deleted by creator
The post is very clearly kink shaming. I have no idea why anyone would be interested in cucking, or in a lot of other kinks, that doesn’t mean I should shame them for it.
The post looks like an 8 year old used a colouring in book, then got their meth smoking brother-cousin to add the text. Not everything is shaming though…
deleted by creator
