… or banned until we have adequate time to study the long term effects this technology will have on child development.
we already struggle as a society with educating and shaping kids into well rounded, emotionally stable, socially competent adults.
we need to do a better job funding and prioritizing child welfare in general before we sign off on allowing billionaire owned Fortune 5 companies a direct pipeline into the consciousness of still developing human minds. just as a matter of public health policy, let alone performance/utility.
Many of us grew up expecting ai due to reading and watching science fiction. I doubt the majority expected it to be controlled by the worst people on the planet, or that it would be used to manipulate society, or that it would be environmentally destructive, or that it would be deliberately used for privacy invasion/control/fascism.
There is some utility, and frankly it won’t go away so kids should eventually be taught its use and its failures.
These LLM models can be very useful for organizing large data sets. I know I’ve saved hours of time by feeding it very specific instructions to create some data classes and subsequent symbology for a couple of hundred points.
However, it never would have worked if I didn’t already have the knowledge on how the software I was using to display my data worked and a strong knowledge of my data. It only worked because I was able to give it hyper specific instructions on how to process my data. Even then I still had to proof and make some tweeks, but ultimately a time saver.
This is what kids need to be taught. The first assignment given in high school allowing the use of AI should task students with running a selection of prompts to produce an incorrect statement or answer. Then students should be instructed to “trick” the AI into giving a wrong answer themselves.
Henry Ford made the car a commercial product for the average American. He’s a terrible guy and was a racist and a Nazi.
Yet it still makes sense for schools to have drivers ed. Most students will drive so investing time into making sure they do it safely is what makes sense.
It’s here, and it will continue to be here. I’d rather it not be, but denial isn’t productive. If we teach students what it’s actually capable of and its limitations maybe we can get people to stop using it as a conversation partner and a search tool.
Also let’s be honest here, my argument for its usefulness handles your issues quite well. Today we have people asking LLMs what to think about topic x. When I argued its usefulness by instructing it to take data set x, provided by the user, and do Y and Z to it. No way to insert an agenda into that. Of course you proof it afterwards as I said
I think that AI as, for example, a super-summarizer, or a search engine on steroids, is fairly good, but it at least should give ALL the sources that were used, put a big disclaimer, and a huge liability of responsibility, as user SHOULD and MUST be reviewing all sources.
Basically, it should be just a tool to find rather niche, rare, obscure or otherwise buried by SEO sources.
But if you just want it to do all the work for you, then you probably should be automatically disqualified from your educative or public institution.
Banned unless utility is proven.
… or banned until we have adequate time to study the long term effects this technology will have on child development.
we already struggle as a society with educating and shaping kids into well rounded, emotionally stable, socially competent adults.
we need to do a better job funding and prioritizing child welfare in general before we sign off on allowing billionaire owned Fortune 5 companies a direct pipeline into the consciousness of still developing human minds. just as a matter of public health policy, let alone performance/utility.
We need to admit that the people who are behind ai make it very obvious that it is currently the very wrong path
There is more to ai than just its potential use.
Many of us grew up expecting ai due to reading and watching science fiction. I doubt the majority expected it to be controlled by the worst people on the planet, or that it would be used to manipulate society, or that it would be environmentally destructive, or that it would be deliberately used for privacy invasion/control/fascism.
It was meant to be a good thing.
Agreed. Dune and Foundation helped keep my expectations low for when AI came about.
I think there’s an argument to be made that the AI of today isn’t what AGI might look like.
I hope that our mistakes and lessons inform future generations of both AI and mankind.
There is some utility, and frankly it won’t go away so kids should eventually be taught its use and its failures.
These LLM models can be very useful for organizing large data sets. I know I’ve saved hours of time by feeding it very specific instructions to create some data classes and subsequent symbology for a couple of hundred points.
However, it never would have worked if I didn’t already have the knowledge on how the software I was using to display my data worked and a strong knowledge of my data. It only worked because I was able to give it hyper specific instructions on how to process my data. Even then I still had to proof and make some tweeks, but ultimately a time saver.
This is what kids need to be taught. The first assignment given in high school allowing the use of AI should task students with running a selection of prompts to produce an incorrect statement or answer. Then students should be instructed to “trick” the AI into giving a wrong answer themselves.
sam altman, alex karp, jensen huang, mark zuckerberg, elon musk… some of the big names of ai
Are these the people you want behind the education of children?
Their agenda is not a better society.
ai was of course inevitable, but as per usual humans are why we cannot have nice things.
Teaching children using something that is so detrimental to the environment, privacy, and standard of living is also disgustingly ironic.
You can name names all you want.
Henry Ford made the car a commercial product for the average American. He’s a terrible guy and was a racist and a Nazi.
Yet it still makes sense for schools to have drivers ed. Most students will drive so investing time into making sure they do it safely is what makes sense.
It’s here, and it will continue to be here. I’d rather it not be, but denial isn’t productive. If we teach students what it’s actually capable of and its limitations maybe we can get people to stop using it as a conversation partner and a search tool.
Also let’s be honest here, my argument for its usefulness handles your issues quite well. Today we have people asking LLMs what to think about topic x. When I argued its usefulness by instructing it to take data set x, provided by the user, and do Y and Z to it. No way to insert an agenda into that. Of course you proof it afterwards as I said
I have no issue with the usa having ai, as long as the usa builds a wall around itself, and its pollution.
Earth deserves better than trash.
Based.
I think that AI as, for example, a super-summarizer, or a search engine on steroids, is fairly good, but it at least should give ALL the sources that were used, put a big disclaimer, and a huge liability of responsibility, as user SHOULD and MUST be reviewing all sources.
Basically, it should be just a tool to find rather niche, rare, obscure or otherwise buried by SEO sources.
But if you just want it to do all the work for you, then you probably should be automatically disqualified from your educative or public institution.