For me at least, the problem isn’t that AI is a demon, or is going to allow demons in in some direct way. Every time a new technology appears and one adopts it, it isn’t long before it becomes difficult to imagine life before it, difficult to connect with the people who don’t use it. In fact, people who don’t use this or that technology are often maligned in some way (think of people who aren’t Amish but don’t drive a car). That’s one trap I don’t want to fall into.
Second, something John said I agree with as a danger, which is to surrender part of your own faculties to the tech. This is something I deal with quite a lot as a professor.
It was briefly mentioned that are people who practically worship AI, who think it will “save” us (what from is not clear). Using these technologies adds to their proliferation - does this not embolden these people?
Short of seeing AI as savior, there’s a risk of coming to see in AI the best potential of a thing it produces. If AI made this thing, found these results, wrote this paper, etc, that’s the best it can be, and there’s no point in trying to do it better ourselves.
Like the Internet before, the fact that AI is trained off of millions of human interactions means that it embodies the culmination of a process that used to require physical presence and a create deal of social learning and grace for/connection with the other people. We’re after the material results while ignoring being human in getting them.
Finally, we all know just how insanely expensive all of these servers and computers required for AI are - we were headed for a water crisis already!
That said, John, if you get an AI companion, you should name it SupraFly.
Nope. Response article forthcoming.
Some thoughts:
For me at least, the problem isn’t that AI is a demon, or is going to allow demons in in some direct way. Every time a new technology appears and one adopts it, it isn’t long before it becomes difficult to imagine life before it, difficult to connect with the people who don’t use it. In fact, people who don’t use this or that technology are often maligned in some way (think of people who aren’t Amish but don’t drive a car). That’s one trap I don’t want to fall into.
Second, something John said I agree with as a danger, which is to surrender part of your own faculties to the tech. This is something I deal with quite a lot as a professor.
It was briefly mentioned that are people who practically worship AI, who think it will “save” us (what from is not clear). Using these technologies adds to their proliferation - does this not embolden these people?
Short of seeing AI as savior, there’s a risk of coming to see in AI the best potential of a thing it produces. If AI made this thing, found these results, wrote this paper, etc, that’s the best it can be, and there’s no point in trying to do it better ourselves.
Like the Internet before, the fact that AI is trained off of millions of human interactions means that it embodies the culmination of a process that used to require physical presence and a create deal of social learning and grace for/connection with the other people. We’re after the material results while ignoring being human in getting them.
Finally, we all know just how insanely expensive all of these servers and computers required for AI are - we were headed for a water crisis already!
That said, John, if you get an AI companion, you should name it SupraFly.