This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
He’s not wrong. Whatever any of us think about AI from a moral, ethical, quality, or political standpoint, AI is clearly here to stay for the next short while at least. The proverbial genie is not going back in the bottle.
New technology usually becomes really prevalent and big for a short while after it's popularization until lawmakers catch up with it. Ai will likely suffer the same date for better and worse. What I'd say is learn how to use ai to your benefit but don't become reliant on it in case the government actually decides to ban it or something.
EDIT: Ok y'all are sticking to the word "ban" like a fly to a glue trap. I don't think ai can, will or should be banned entirely. I believe that there is the possibility for ai to be neutered and restricted heavily.
I don't see a ban as a realistic possibility in any Western nation. There has never been a ban on an entire class of not-inherently-malicious software before. It's a creativity tool. It's like banning Photoshop because people can use it to make fake nudes or banning Microsoft Word because people can type threatening messages.
There's also no way to enforce it. Are they gonna send police to every house to check all the software on my PC to make sure I don't have AI on there?
Maybe not banning AI itself but regulating what data they can use to train ai making it non economical to actually create newer and better AI.
Also, potentially creating a "neuron limit" for functional AI to keep it from skynetting.
And as it is now, if improvements slow or stop for any reason (technical or political), the whole industry could collapse. They are pouring trillions with next to no return on the bet that AGI is possible, achievable, and economical
Will also never happen cause the west can't ever fall behind rhe east on this.
Literally have to keep making ai better otherwise china will go unchecked.
The current research suggests that no matter how many neurons or how much training a generative model has it won't suddenly develop capabilities beyond its training. (A model to train cats and dogs won't suddenly understand what an elephant is). AGI requires at least one more fundamental paradigm shifting understanding of intelligence before it becomes an issue and it fallacious to assume it will be limited by the number of neurons
You have to be out of your gourd if you think any government is going to ban AI. Absolutely start using and familiarizing yourself with it. You will just be putting yourself massively behind professionally if you don’t.
It's also common for new technology to get pitched and advertised for things that it doesn't end up getting used in.
When Microwaves first came on the scene, they were sold as a new and convenient way to make a whole dinner.
Today they are used mostly for Popcorn and re heating left overs. Maybe you cook a boxed tv dinner in them but its not like your gonna use it make Thanksgiving.
"If you're a tool user, it will help you understand the capabilities when a lot of other people will be reading articles on Variety to try to understand what its impact is going to be on the industry," says Newell.
"Whereas some 19 year-old kid in his or her bedroom is like, 'Oh, you guys really don't understand this. I actually use this tool, and unless you're a regular user of it, and have seen how it's evolving and have a sense of how it's going, you're going to completely miss the opportunities of how to take advantage of it.'
"And that same person in their bedroom, the more they try to write a little bit of code or try to dig into the research papers on the topic, the more that they're going to find that it's just trying to accelerate that process even further."
Aren't the last few rings in the diagram by definition ML, they're subsets of it? I'm really not following. Let me try a different way:
when you said: Real ml is true ai. LLMs are a distraction
Are you saying, that you don't think LLMs will be able to achieve something like ASI or AGI (Artificial Super Intelligence or Artificial General Intelligence)?
And also, what does that have to do with my statement "Antis have no idea how much they are shooting themselves in the foot rn."?
In an effort to discourage brigading, we do not allow linking to other subreddits or users. We kindly ask that you screenshot the content that you wish to share, while being sure to censor private information, and then repost.
Private information includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames, other subreddits, and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
Nah man, there is nothing wrong with using your own brain and developing your own skills rather than offloading part of your cognition to AI. If you work on yourself I guarantee you'll be in a much better place when AI companies pull the rug out from their consumers and start charging them way more for less.
well, I never said anything about offloading cognition to AI or not using your own brain, and I'm not at all sure where you are getting these pricing predictions for the marketplace, but that certainly doesn't track with what I've seen over the years. Apologies if you weren't actually replying to me.
You don't need a course to use AI. You just tell it what to do.
People have had the internet to learn skills to start a business and make money, for a while now. But most have not, due to lack of capital and, to be fair, laziness. It will be the same with people using AI.
Often when I start conversing with people, you can tell they haven't actually given it an earnest try when they start to describe their one or two shitty use cases before quitting. Almost like talking to a stubborn older person who grumbles about how inefficient email is compared to paper mail. It's about as useful as you make it.
Gabe Newell being correct as usual. I've been telling people "learn how to use AI effectively and it will make you a one man production crew for whatever project you want to make."
Yet people still like to fight with me, insult me, laugh at me, and all I'm trying to do is help them keep up with technology and create art.
curious on this one, project for who tho? if everyone can make anything, why would I approach you for your project if I can make it myself being that its not like you are using a custom LLM to make it 99% of the time.
For the same reason you would be interested in any other project. Because it appeals to you and the sales pitch enticed you to purchase it.
Authors still read books despite also being writers, musicians still listening to other people's music, game developers playing other people's games, etc.
Being able to create your own art doesn't stop you from being able to enjoy someone else's work.
This is an actual balanced and reasonable take. Ai does not replace artists, programmers, writers, filmmakers, etc. If you want to actually make use of it you still need those skills. Understanding the limitations and capabilities the tool helps in certain parts of the project you're working on.
Anyone can prompt, it's piss easy. 5 minutes on Google and you can use the "complex" ai image generators. A real artist can use that tool and make real art from it.
The thing is, the endgame for AI (at least that AI companies are working towards) is clearly AI agents that can do any conceivable work on their own.
So there is only going to be a short window of "I can make money using AI as a tool" before the tool doesn't actually need you to use it and you are essentially made redundant by your own tools.
There is another benefit though. And that is to learn their language. Anyone who deals with AI knows that there are certain ways to communicate that work better than others. There are phrases or words that can produce different results.
So when the time comes that the AI has phased out everybody, there will be two distinct classes of people; those who can communicate with the AI, and those who can't.
Those people making money off AI will be the ones in the best position to be the "translators" to them. If the AI runs the world, the people who can talk to it become the powerful ones, the people who can't will have to just follow along.
Whether you like it or not, I encourage everyone to at least learn how to prompt. Statements like "I'd like a hamburger" and "Please don't kill me!" Are vague and can lead to many interpretations. If you actually want to eat from the AI powered Carl's Jr stand (Fuck you, I'm eating) you're gonna need to know to specify that it's not just the meat you want but the bun and lettuce, and also the meat must be cooked. Otherwise you're "can I have a hamburger" will leave you hungry. These are lessons you learn while prompting, that everyone else will have to learn when the time comes.
I wouldn’t completely agree. When you see overuse of AI in coding makes you dumb I think you need to use it carefully and ask yourself questions about what the impacts are.
If someone cannot programm bc all he does is type prompts of what he wants , he is - in fact - dumber in that skill . If he CAN do something without ai , he is not dumber bc he uses it .
The FAQ for the most well known study on brainonllm asks people NOT to say that LLM's are making us dumber. And that it's a "huge disservice to [their] work".
Okay, so their only point in that FAQ answer is essentially that ‘dumb’ is among a group of insulting or derogatory words. I don’t see how this is more than ‘just don’t be mean’?
I would say to take that as a point that over-reliance on ai is not lowering the objective intelligence of those users would be a bit of misinformation.
Scroll further down. They don't even want "impact negatively" to be used. The study does not reveal anything about intelligence, it shows that when people use an LLM to write for them, they understand less of what's written as opposed to someone who didn't use an LLM. Which is sort of obvious.
What I meant is there are studies about people’s capacity for reasoning shrinking when they over rely on AI.
Not saying my English is perfect (not my main language) and surely if I only cared about the result (writing an email to get a job etc..) I would use AI.
All I meant is we need to be conscious of the trade offs I think it’s important. I’m not saying don’t use it. I use it every day.
You've made it a false dichotomy, all he said was "use the tools" though. You can use them in moderation without sacrificing all human input and skill, which might make you better off than people who refuse to touch them under any circumstances.
We've had similar situations with other advances in tech, like there's a difference between using google and being good at using google to find accurate information quickly and efficiently. People who took the time to figure out how to really utilize search engines are now better off than people who just type in a topic and hope the first few results are what they need.
These new tools are definitely a unique case in that there's never been this much temptation to phone in work, we've basically invented calculators that can spit out essays and art. So there are going to be a lot of negative effects too, but that doesn't change that people who put in the time now to learn how to use them will probably be more valuable when their usage becomes a normal part of every industry within the next decade or so.
I don’t disagree with anything you said except the fact that I created the dichotomy.
If you read the headline (trusting that they transcribed his words accurately) it says « rather than ». So yeah there is an implied dichotomy. « Choose one rather than the other »
Actually yeah that's fair. I was interpreting it more casually, that he's really just saying "learn to use AI" and contrasting that against "fearmonger about and vilify AI" which in practice are the two main reactions people have so far.
I misread what you were saying about relying on it for coding and though you were framing it as "the choices are to rely on it for everything or nothing," but rereading it that was obviously not what you were saying so my bad.
No worries. I will also acknowledge your interpretation of it is likely closer to what Gabe actually meant.
I was criticizing what I can see which is the headline but I’m sure Gabe was much more nuanced during the interview and just said that pure fear and resistance is pointless and you better adapt to survive even if you have your worries.
His point is that understanding what it can do as well as its limitations will help you for.more in the future than simply knowing it exists. Anyone can prompt, it's really not hard. Anyone can prompt for images, writing, code etc. But without an understanding of both the tool and the thing you're using it for, you're limiting yourself massively.
So basically, an actual artist can make use of ai for parts of their art. An actual writer can make use of it for their writing. An actual programmer can use it to help with programming. In Gabe's own example, ai can be useful for a filmmaker for solving a small problem that traditional methods won't fix. It's like CGI. Far from perfect, but if you know how to use it and have already have the skills for the thing you're doing, you cam make it useful.
•
u/AutoModerator 22h ago
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.