AI 2023. Meet ChatGPT. - page 189
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
exorcisms
Yeah. You could say that.)
That is, the "sellers" who indoctrinated me to buy their books for their particularly fascinating content are Stanislaw Lem, Ray Bradbury, H.G. Wells, and the whole league of science fiction writers I've read or watched in film adaptations. They prepared a springboard in my subconscious from childhood and paved it with fertile ground on which all these ideas about AI and interests in technology later grew. But did it do me any good? We can say unequivocally that if this content is not removed from the head in time, the harm to the personality will be inevitable. And the older a person thinking in such categories and living in such worlds, the worse it is for him. I repeat - this opinion is based on personal experience.
But why? Why is it that the older a person is, the more dangerous for him these fantasies/Worlds and in general any abstract interests are?
Because whether a person wants to or not, he exists in conditions of social competition.
Here we have come to the criterion/measure determining the rationality of all activities of a person - success or failure in the society.
Hence such concepts as efficiency, organisation, awareness of the conditions of one's environment, the ability to give oneself credit, weigh one's performance, optimise one's decisions... are derived from this.
You know what that sounds like? - The AI that everyone is afraid of in the films.))
But did it do me any good? It can be said unequivocally that if this content is not removed from your mind in time, harm to your personality will be inevitable.
It's like going from extreme to extreme. If everything is judged only on the principle of "usefulness", then why not completely ban all music, films, books as "useless".
Only work-achievement-power-subordination will remain. And to seek pleasure in this is equal to limiting personal development. Man is a creature capable of thinking, contemplating, imagining and also taking pleasure in the same, but created by other people.
In the end, of course, we need a golden mean, but not extremes.
It's like going from extreme to extreme. If everything is judged only on the principle of "usefulness", then why not completely ban all music, films, books as "useless".
Only work-achievement-power-subordination will remain. And to seek pleasure in this is equal to limiting personal development. Man is a creature capable of thinking, contemplating, imagining and also getting pleasure from the same, but created by other people.
In the end, of course, we need a golden mean, but not extremes.
It's a circus
Watch with popcorn and coke only.
That is, the "sellers" who indoctrinated me to buy their books for their particularly fascinating content are Stanislaw Lem, Ray Bradbury, H.G. Wells, and the whole league of science fiction writers I've read or watched in film adaptations. They prepared a springboard in my subconscious from childhood and paved it with fertile ground on which all these ideas about AI and interests in technology later grew. But did it do me any good? We can say unequivocally that if this content is not removed from the head in time, the harm to the personality will be inevitable. And the older a person thinking in such categories and living in such worlds, the worse it is for him. I repeat - this opinion is based on personal experience.
I also read Herbert as a child, I liked him very much. Of course, there is no benefit :)
Many people also start to get obsessed with children's stories, a lot of things remain from childhood. The same Zadornov was obsessed in his time.
Pseudoscientific theories, too.
The funniest thing is that such people cease to understand where the truth is and where they are being bullshitted. Because there is some truth there :)) And you can't define the boundaries without scrupulous analysis.
The so-called "Soft Power" that the media uses.
Yesterday I decided to ask LLM GigaChat what the ending of an AI story might be, given the hints made. Here's the answer:
Концовка рассказа про искусственный интеллект может быть следующей:
After much research and reflection, the protagonist comes to the conclusion that the idea of artificial intelligence rising up is just an illusion created by the market and advertising. He realises that the development of AI is driven by the market and the needs of society, and that advertising and suggestion play an important role in selling new technologies.
He realises that a mature person does not choose fantasies but acts as efficiently as possible by spending time, prioritising and being constantly aware of his activities. He realises that immature people are afraid of AI because they don't know how to manage their time and priorities as effectively.
At the end of the story, the protagonist concludes that AI is simply a tool that can be used for good or evil. He encourages readers to be critical and informed consumers and users of AI, and calls for responsible and ethical use of this technology.
He realises that AI is not a threat to humanity but requires an informed and responsible approach. He also realises that AI can be used to improve people's lives if it is used wisely and with consideration of the ethical and social implications.
Eventually, the protagonist frees his mind from illusions and pseudoscientific nonsense, and begins to use AI as a tool to improve his life and the lives of those around him.
It's like going from extreme to extreme. If everything is judged only on the principle of "usefulness", then why not completely ban all music, films, books as "useless".
Only work-achievement-power-subordination will remain. And to seek pleasure in this is equal to limiting personal development. Man is a creature capable of thinking, contemplating, imagining and also getting pleasure from the same, but created by other people.
In the end, of course, we need a golden mean, but not extremes.
In the context of ruthless market conditions and social competition, music, films, books, blogs and any other medium of human feelings, emotions and worlds are commodities, and commodities sell best when they penetrate the wall of the subconsciousness of buyers.
As a result of the never-ending market process, the subconscious mind of buyers is subjected to endless attacks by sellers who hone their skills to perfection. Sellers have a predominantly developed neocortex - thinking, logic, analysis, self-reporting, efficiency, balance and organisation - which the market demands of them, while buyers have deliberately develop the limbic brain - variable emotions, feelings, experiences, moods, intuition and meanings. The bottom line is that the limbic brain will always lose out to the neocortex, because it is the neocortex that distinguishes us from underdeveloped animals. It's the source of intelligence.
The point is to close your subconscious mind to the stream of suggestion coming from the global marketplace and switch on the rational side of consciousness.
I would add: Order is measurable, Efficiency is measurable, Success is measurable, but Feelings cannot be measured. Evolutionarily man is moving towards awareness and efficiency. But this is further on in the narrative).
If the axioms are false, then the proofs will be false. The author suffers from choosing false axioms.
For example, earlier the author claimed that generative networks will never be able to achieve realistic images. They just can't and that's it.
This was followed by the claim that networks will never be able to achieve the correct number of fingers on a hand. This statement is false because the number of fingers is not always 5 on each limb in 100% of people. But, that's beside the point, networks are now generating the "correct" number of fingers.
Then came the statement that networks will never be able to achieve the atmosphere of real artists. They can, they can do any atmosphere.
What happened next?
Now the author builds hypotheses and proofs again on false axioms, such as no benefit for the author.)))))
And so on. Recently, in a similar thread, an example was given of children who had no social contact until the age of 5, and that such children were subsequently prevented from learning speech. This happens because the child simply has not formed the appropriate neural connections in the brain, and at a later age they do not arise (there are others, but not those necessary for the speech apparatus).
The essence is that a person needs information, and the relevant information forms the appropriate neural connections, and in this case is formed not only fully man in mental development, but also in emotional and "spiritual". Books have always been such a source of information, and it is reading the text that is very important for the development of speech. A person starts to develop differently now precisely because less and less people read, more and more they perceive information in the form of video or sound.
Ok, books are useless, people need to read and know less, then people's brains will be simpler, and therefore it will be easier to control such people.
Same with neural networks in general and AI in particular. What they are taught, that is what a person will get. It is one thing to teach a network by the book Mein Kampf, and another thing to teach it by good children's books, where it is very clear that it is impossible to offend younger people and girls, that it is bad to lie and slander, that it is disgusting to take someone else's things. So, what a human or AI - unambiguously, what they teach, that's what comes out.
I recommend the author to continue reading books, to develop the brain and neural connections in it. Try to invent and invent something, create and create instead of judging and criticising. This will at least allow you to live longer (it has been proven that people with active mental work live longer and keep their mind and memory longer), and this in itself is useful, instead of looking for profit in everything.
In the context of ruthless market conditions and social competition, music, films, books, blogs and any other medium of human feelings, emotions and worlds are commodities, and commodities sell best when they penetrate the wall of the buyers' subconscious. That is, sellers have predominantly developed neocortex - thinking, logic, analysis, self-reporting, efficiency, weightedness and organisation - the market demands it of them, and buyers have deliberately developed limbic brain - variable emotions, feelings, experiences, moods, intuition, meanings. As a result of the endlessly ongoing market process, the buyers' subconscious is subjected to endless attacks by sellers who hone their skills to perfection. The bottom line is that the limbic brain will always lose to the neocortex, because it is the neocortex that distinguishes us from low-developed animals. It's the source of intelligence. Reason will always prevail over the senses.
The point is to close your subconscious mind from the flow of suggestion coming from the information market and switch on the rational side of your consciousness.
I will add that: Order is measurable, Efficiency is measurable, Success is measurable, and Feelings cannot be measured. Evolutionarily man is moving towards awareness and efficiency. But this is further on in the narrative).
"We'll Make You Happy" by "The Younglings in the Universe".
You might also remember Kilow from Veltistov's Sip of the Sun.I also read Herbert as a kid, loved it. No benefit, of course :)
Many people also start to get obsessed with children's stories, a lot of things remain from childhood. The same Zadornov was obsessed in his time.
Pseudoscientific theories, too.
The funniest thing is that such people cease to understand where the truth is and where they are being bullshitted. Because there is some truth there :)) And you can't define the boundaries without a thorough analysis.
The so-called "Soft Power" that the media uses.
Childhood in general is the source of all human misfortunes.)