I don't want this to become an excuse for the state to no longer invest in those areas, because ChatGPT can do it. It can do many things but we haven't studied the impact of what it does.

Plus it uses the work others have done to do those things. Without credit.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə To be honest, I still don't really understand the difference between divestment and disinvestment. I took your term to mean 'taking investments out of or not investing anymore (or any more)'

@Mitch Ah ok, so you got my meaning.

Looking it up... I still don't get the difference, or rather the difference is very nuanced and techinical and doesn't change what we're talking about, 'less money in'.

This is ELU-town after all.

Yep.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə Oh, that's interesting.

What area of the world are you talking about/are you in?

Speaking of language, in my world (Quebec, Canada) people speak a different variety of French than that from France, and it happens quite a lot that conversational bots don't get it. And people are talking to their phones or whatever and it doesn't work. Will people have to speak a mainstream variety of the language to gain access to services?

Or I hear some teachers very much into AI stating things like "should we ask students to know stuff like the date the country came into being" or this formal piece of knowledge when the bots can find it "just in time" for them to use. They challenge the need for declarative knowledge and all. They claim students must be geared to make queries basically. I ask, without this knowledge, how it will affect human condition.

Humanism.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə Yes, that is the case, but ... hmm... while it might be a problem, it doesn't feel to me like that is a huge problem in that it will more likely make it possible for writers/artists to also make money (making it easier to write/produce artwork. I don't -know- this, in fact I don't have a good handle on all the ways that image and text generators could work. So that's why I'm unsure it will take money away from human producers.

but...

I would argue without some level of declarative knowledge the mind cannot bring to fruition deep rooted values.

I hear you. Most likely impact will be reduced wages.

So I ask the first ones to face this be IT Engineers, especially software developers and bank managers from the Valley.

whatever the reality for the producers... if you think government will actively choose to di(sin)vest because they -think- ChatGPT can do everything, then yeah that's a looming problem I don't know how to stop.

I'm not sure the letter has the force of persuasion to encourage companies (or governments) to do anything.

I don't know. Time will tell, but I believe in having a strong regulatory framework. Because "disruptive tech" is merely tech that exploits regulatory loopholes and people with little protection lower socio-economics imho.

Cab drivers, hotels employees etc.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə There's a comparison with when cheap calculators came out... "How will kids learn how to do arithmetic when they know the calculator can do it for them?" The educational system has survived that (mostly?)

Yes, true, but the scope of what AI can do is much greater and the way to assess it differs from mastering math and operators.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə Yeah that's a problem. There's lots of research and development into dealing with it too. But yeah there's a bit of tyranny of the majority.

I'm no expert in the field. But I believe this time the devs should be the guinea pigs. Let them be the copilots of Copilot.

And have their wages cut in half. To boot.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə Yeah, there's something Uber that doesn't feel right.

I'm just a pamphlétaire, just stirring up stuff for other people to think it through. But from what I've seen from uber, airbnb and personal data/targeted ads, I believe it's time to stop setting the charrue avant les boeufs. I thought engineering was about planning, plans, ethics, proof.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə well, that really is happening, lots of devs use copilot (and love it). I don't know how it's working out with inexperienced devs.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə Usually when a tool comes along, instead of removing a job, it just means more throughput is expected or the job shifts.

I believe the tech has lots to offer. But I really want to see managers say to devs that since GPT4+ can build code at least as good as they can, they shouldn't be paid like full-stack devs, but rather like proofreaders of code.

But yes sometimes jobs are lost, like leather work for horseriding.

We're talking 300M jobs here at least.

I really want tech people to be in the first batch this time.

And among those OpenAI devs should be the first ones.

Let GPT4 build GPT5.

OpenAI can lower its cost base by paying its devs less. That sounds like an excellent idea to me.

Then obviously GPT can top level manage the banks in the Valley much better than what we've seen. Investors can see greater returns if we cut the fat at the top of the food chain.

GPT can sanitize costs in those industries first. It'll be a proof of concept. I really like this idea.

Yeah sorry for the sarcasm. I'm really not satisfied with how this is unfolding. I want to see ethics be a greater concern. But I believe those responsible for what will happen should be accountable, liable, and personally experience the impacts of this in their lives. It's the only way they can understand imho.

Video generated by a new AI engine in response to the request "Will Smith eating spaghetti"

I no longer trust this industry. I trust regulations.

Cheers.

If AI takes over the world, I'm going to the nearest registration office and changing my name to Theodore Kaczynski.

Maybe AI will be scared and stay off me.

The Rickroll test is the new Turing Test.

I asked ChatGPT to write a short verse in which it muses about the limits imposed by the text corpus it was trained on.

Impressive.

I can feel a glimpse of real intelligence there.

> From Middle English wede, from Old English wǣd (“dress, attire, clothing, garment”), from Proto-Germanic *wēdiz, from which also wad, wadmal. Cognate with Dutch lijnwaad, Dutch gewaad, German Wat.

> Oude liefde in nieuw gewaad

> Old love in new clothes

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə People (dev managers) may think that GPT can write code, but in reality it can just provide a good basis, needing a lot of fixes, and only for stuff that is similar to stuff already written. That's an example where in reality GPT/copilot will help experienced coders immensely but it won't replace them. It might make it easier for a non expert too but I'm less sure of that.

But as I implied before, reality may not matter if dev managers are fooled into thinking that fewer programmers are needed.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə haha yeah that's not going to happen.

@ʁəʄɘləmɘlə people are reacting without thinking about consequences, yes.

As you type, a 3D world emerges - AI engine attached to some 3D Studio editor.

@Mitch It's Sonnet 76 by Shakespeare, I memorized it years ago :)

I love it.

(Millay)