The artificial intelligence MEGATHREAD

[canpakes]

I am very curious why AI is such a threat but just plain ass stupid and vulgar is fine, making up lies about what people think is fine and even applauded. But AI?

I don't know that I've had any interactions with you or even what your views are on one thing or another...but I think you're spot on in making this comment.

Regards,
MG

An issue with AI here appears to have come about as a result of how it has been used. If it’s only being employed to quickly generate huge swaths of text in a supposed response to another person in a conversation - but that text hasn’t been cross-checked by the user - then the danger exists that what is being posted could be more trash than treasure.

Remember when RFK Jr. presented his Make America Healthy Again manifesto to Congress, but relied heavily on AI without checking that content, resulting in nonexistent studies being imagined (hallucinated is the proper term) and listed in footnotes that linked to nowhere?

https://www.science.org/content/article ... n-s-health

Maybe imagine AI to be akin to alcohol for this comparison. Is alcohol inherently problematic, or is it that what someone chooses to do with alcohol that can potentially be problematic?

Further, from the LDS perspective, counsel from God arguably states that alcohol shouldn’t be used. I’m guessing that you’d abide that guidance because the counsel is from God, as far as LDS doctrine states. On this board, Shades is God. If Shades asks users to not use AI in their posts, what is the reason to ignore Shades’ request?

[MG 2.0]

I don't know that I've had any interactions with you or even what your views are on one thing or another...but I think you're spot on in making this comment.

Regards,
MG

An issue with AI here appears to have come about as a result of how it has been used. If it’s only being employed to quickly generate huge swaths of text in a supposed response to another person in a conversation - but that text hasn’t been cross-checked by the user - then the danger exists that what is being posted could be more trash than treasure.

More than once I made it clear I “approve this message”. I read through every A.I. response to see if it conformed to my own thoughts, opinions, and knowledge. But no, that wasn’t good enough.

Whiskey makes a good point.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

It was within the Gemini link that the concern was alleviated/squelched. Honestly, I think that the reason A.I. is unwanted is that the information available is so easily and quickly accessible. It would/did put a stop to some of the incomplete and/or misdirection that happens when critics can throw sh** against the wall without anyone cleaning up the mess.

It is what it is.

It gives an overwhelming advantage to the critics on a board such as this where the numbers are so imbalanced. A.I. at least opened up the possibility that critics could be responded to with factual information that counter to their mud slinging, and that it could be done in a timely manner.

Regards,
MG

I believe that this excuse has already been dealt with - even if you don't accept it…

I don’t. I approved all A.I responses before posting them and taking responsibility for their content. That should be good enough.

It’s not. And yet loads of other useless shenanigans is permitted and even encouraged.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Do you know the difference between fact and opinion?

Yes, as I’m sure you do.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

To me it appeared that Limnor was using A.I., especially at the speed we were going back and forth. But yeah, I guess he could be super humanly awesome.

Regards,
MG

LOL. What Limnor posted was very clever. But super human? Nah. Neither was your projection.

I’m not convinced.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

It was within the Gemini link that the concern was alleviated/squelched. Honestly, I think that the reason A.I. is unwanted is that the information available is so easily and quickly accessible. It would/did put a stop to some of the incomplete and/or misdirection that happens when critics can throw sh** against the wall without anyone cleaning up the mess.

It is what it is.

It gives an overwhelming advantage to the critics on a board such as this where the numbers are so imbalanced. A.I. at least opened up the possibility that critics could be responded to with factual information that counter to their mud slinging, and that it could be done in a timely manner.

Regards,
MG

So the problem isn’t AI, it’s that critics have access to too much accurate information, too fast.

Your conclusion, not mine.

Regards,
MG

[canpakes]

An issue with AI here appears to have come about as a result of how it has been used. If it’s only being employed to quickly generate huge swaths of text in a supposed response to another person in a conversation - but that text hasn’t been cross-checked by the user - then the danger exists that what is being posted could be more trash than treasure.

More than once I made it clear I “approve this message”. I read through every A.I. response to see if it conformed to my own thoughts, opinions, and knowledge. But no, that wasn’t good enough.

Whiskey makes a good point.

Regards,
MG

What about the second part of the post, regarding the DM godhead’s wishes?

[malkie]

I believe that this excuse has already been dealt with - even if you don't accept it…

I don’t. I approved all A.I responses before posting them and taking responsibility for their content. That should be good enough.

It’s not. And yet loads of other useless shenanigans is permitted and even encouraged.

Regards,
MG

When you have your own eternal domain, you can set the rules such that AI content is acceptable, if the poster "approves" the content.

Will you then permit posters to constantly complain about your rules, and insist that your rules stack the deck against them - a.k.a. acting the martyr?

You may recall that I suggested a compromise solution, but that the owner of this domain was not convinced that it would work. In any case, he articulated quite clearly what is and is not permitted, and why. But do carry on complaining.

[malkie]

I have a suggestion for everyone who doesn't like the way a post is written - this is nothing short of brilliant! if I do say so myself. I bet nobody has ever thought of this before! This might even work for MG!!

Purely optional, of course!

If you think the post contains jackassed Authentic Unintelligence, or perhaps useless shenanigans, don't engage - either with the entire post, or at least with the objectionable part(s). Likewise with any content you think may be AI-generated. Likewise with anything that appears to be pointless complaining.

What do you think? Perhaps I'm not such a slouch in the thinking department after all!

[please excuse the overuse of exclamation points - I'm just so overcome with enthusiasm that I can't help it!]

[Whiskey]

I have a suggestion for everyone who doesn't like the way a post is written - this is nothing short of brilliant! if I do say so myself. I bet nobody has ever thought of this before! This might even work for MG!!

Purely optional, of course!

If you think the post contains jackassed Authentic Unintelligence, or perhaps useless shenanigans, don't engage - either with the entire post, or at least with the objectionable part(s). Likewise with any content you think may be AI-generated. Likewise with anything that appears to be pointless complaining.

What do you think? Perhaps I'm not such a slouch in the thinking department after all!

[please excuse the overuse of exclamation points - I'm just so overcome with enthusiasm that I can't help it!]

That works.

Addressing the contemt without making every goddamn post about the poster is also fine.