For the ethics, I personally think these things should be nationalized / universalized, given that it runs on mass theft. That’s Meta’s argument: we stole so much, you can’t hold us legally accountable. Sure thing bud: let’s get half your profit then?
For the environmental, to me, it’s akin to driving a car. It’s very socially acceptable to do that in most places in the US. Does it contribute to worsening environment and have long term impacts? Yup, sure does. I have 1 car for our family. We used to have 2. We made a positive step, but we couldn’t lower to one. Does it make me a bad person? I don’t think so. Proportionally, I don’t think my AI usage is that impactful compared to Meta/Amazon/big tech company. Is it still bad? Yup, sure is.
That’s the reason I sidestep those, along with simplifying a complex topic I knew I would be flamed for.
Literacy matters. Seems like you’re trying to push on “what if we all did it?” And yeah, there’s some idiocracy future potential. However, I don’t think it’s addressing the issue. I mentioned John Henry because that’s partially what his story is about: man v. machine. People likely wrote faster with typewriters, and I bet people claimed literacy would go down with them. Maybe? But the reading is really essential in this process. That’s my claim.
I’ll grant there’s a degree problem with the IDE analogy, but I still think it’s a technological progression that makes rational sense.
I wouldn’t make shovelware. Many people will. I’ve said to friends I expect a Cambrian explosion. Life in all forms, good or bad. We’ll get apps that could never have been made and the worst malware to exist. It’s a Pandora’s box. The internet made us closer and brought out a lot of evil in the world. To me, internet & AI are tools, not inherently good or bad. (Philosophically, if there was no thieving of data)
I think you’re making reasonable points. I also think most people have not reconciled “it’s faster to read than to type.” It’s a strange inversion in AI workflows that comes from the mechanics at play.
Machine read speed: 1m wpm (96k per 5 secs, based on token usage of a well known model)
Machine write speed: ~6000 wpm (again, based on token usage & turnaround)
It’s not that we’re close. We’re miles apart. If we’re in a capitalistic hellscape (which, I think there’s maybe some evidence for, given on friendly convo :) ), then my competitor will beat me on speed. Why would I move a bunch of product on a hand cart vs. a train?
Thanks for the human interaction, by the way. I appreciate you engaging in earnest.
Thanks for your effort in replying too, I cherish these. Agree on the ethics and environmental points, I have nothing to add there!
I do feel that I understand where you’re coming from more now. It seemed like the focus of the argument before was just about the capacity of the tool (which is very interesting, I meant to ask for the numbers and forgot, thanks), so I’m glad we can get more nuanced.
Literacy matters! I struggled to keep this topic limited to video games, I did somewhat disregard the John Henry reference for that reason. I still don’t understand the claim here, though – are you saying that reading is more essential than writing for the purpose of literacy? It’d help me to reword that if you could.
I like the Cambrian explosion allegory because we saw something similar with the printing press and typewriter, and we certainly will here too. I’m coming from a much less realistic point-of-view than I’m sure you are as someone who works in the industry – Pandora’s Box is already open, we can’t hope to ban it or anything similar.
I appreciate the well written reply.
For the ethics, I personally think these things should be nationalized / universalized, given that it runs on mass theft. That’s Meta’s argument: we stole so much, you can’t hold us legally accountable. Sure thing bud: let’s get half your profit then?
For the environmental, to me, it’s akin to driving a car. It’s very socially acceptable to do that in most places in the US. Does it contribute to worsening environment and have long term impacts? Yup, sure does. I have 1 car for our family. We used to have 2. We made a positive step, but we couldn’t lower to one. Does it make me a bad person? I don’t think so. Proportionally, I don’t think my AI usage is that impactful compared to Meta/Amazon/big tech company. Is it still bad? Yup, sure is.
That’s the reason I sidestep those, along with simplifying a complex topic I knew I would be flamed for.
Literacy matters. Seems like you’re trying to push on “what if we all did it?” And yeah, there’s some idiocracy future potential. However, I don’t think it’s addressing the issue. I mentioned John Henry because that’s partially what his story is about: man v. machine. People likely wrote faster with typewriters, and I bet people claimed literacy would go down with them. Maybe? But the reading is really essential in this process. That’s my claim.
I’ll grant there’s a degree problem with the IDE analogy, but I still think it’s a technological progression that makes rational sense.
I wouldn’t make shovelware. Many people will. I’ve said to friends I expect a Cambrian explosion. Life in all forms, good or bad. We’ll get apps that could never have been made and the worst malware to exist. It’s a Pandora’s box. The internet made us closer and brought out a lot of evil in the world. To me, internet & AI are tools, not inherently good or bad. (Philosophically, if there was no thieving of data)
I think you’re making reasonable points. I also think most people have not reconciled “it’s faster to read than to type.” It’s a strange inversion in AI workflows that comes from the mechanics at play.
It’s not that we’re close. We’re miles apart. If we’re in a capitalistic hellscape (which, I think there’s maybe some evidence for, given on friendly convo :) ), then my competitor will beat me on speed. Why would I move a bunch of product on a hand cart vs. a train?
Thanks for the human interaction, by the way. I appreciate you engaging in earnest.
Thanks for your effort in replying too, I cherish these. Agree on the ethics and environmental points, I have nothing to add there!
I do feel that I understand where you’re coming from more now. It seemed like the focus of the argument before was just about the capacity of the tool (which is very interesting, I meant to ask for the numbers and forgot, thanks), so I’m glad we can get more nuanced.
Literacy matters! I struggled to keep this topic limited to video games, I did somewhat disregard the John Henry reference for that reason. I still don’t understand the claim here, though – are you saying that reading is more essential than writing for the purpose of literacy? It’d help me to reword that if you could.
I like the Cambrian explosion allegory because we saw something similar with the printing press and typewriter, and we certainly will here too. I’m coming from a much less realistic point-of-view than I’m sure you are as someone who works in the industry – Pandora’s Box is already open, we can’t hope to ban it or anything similar.
Be well, internet homie.