Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

A1pH4W01v t1_j6csj0q wrote

Man what is with people wanting absolute dependency on AI.

25

Soggy_Ad7165 t1_j6d9flm wrote

This sub is filled with software engineering students that think because it solved their assignment chatgpt will conquer the world.

I was excited when I first tried out chatgpt. But after trying to incorparate it into my daily work it proved to be pretty limited. Its a better google. It has minimal impact. And just like Dall E only replaced some Fivr designers or "artists" who never got beyond minimum wage anyway, chatgpt will replace a tiny amount of "developers".

And in the end Jevons paradox comes into play additional. Scale up efficiency and you end up with more "resource" consumption. In this case the resource is a human programmer.

20

UltravioletClearance t1_j6dc3k7 wrote

A lot of people get swept up in marketing. OpenAI is yet another tech startup that leveraged venture capital to rapidly scale and market a "disruptive" technology into our lives with no plans to grow the company or product. I'm not worried about my job because I don't think OpenAI will even exist in a decade.

We see this trend time and time again, and it almost always results in the tech company going belly up and a return to the way things were. AirBnB killed hotels... now people are flocking back to hotels because AirBnB sucks. Uber/Lyft killed taxis... now people are flocking back to taxis and public transportation because Uber/Lyft sucks.

5

gefex t1_j6f73k4 wrote

I thought this, its basically an upgrade on Googling it on stackoverflow. You get a more tailored response. It will give you the pieces of a puzzle but you would always need a developer to put them together.

Its useful when you have a very specific thing you need to write that is easy enough to explain in english, but bigger picture stuff I can't see it ever being capable of dealing with.

3

Richard7666 t1_j6gunru wrote

I'm learning Unreal Engine. Wanted to know how to make parameterised material where I can offset the texture easily.

ChatGpt gave me a very convincing-sounding step by step, 7 point answer...that was entirely fictitious.

3

nembajaz t1_j6cxct2 wrote

Dependency? Good tool in good hands, is it really dependency?

3

A1pH4W01v t1_j6d0ytw wrote

Its 1 thing to have a tool that can save you time, money and effort on whatever youre doing

But it is a problem when people are wanting a future where everything is expected to be done for you while not even bothering to give a single thought into it.

From the work that youre supposed to do, to even the creative ideas youre supposed to imagine, and even down to the simple things like what to fucking eat, seems like so many people just want AI to do the thinking or immediately show the result.

0

nembajaz t1_j6d1ebs wrote

Your art will be your art. More time to live your life is always a good thing. There always will be problems and goals, it's just a dramatically different situation we don't know anything about. In fact, we tend to make more and more problems and goals as we "evolve".

0

A1pH4W01v t1_j6d2vby wrote

I mean we're already making a problem because of one problem, which is overdependency via ego.

More time to live our lives but with how people are acting now, many would rather be toxic while expecting as many good results with no effort. Not even the slightest effort.

Not to mention, problems and goals should always start with us, and end with us, thats how we evolve. Relying on someone or something else too much to create a solution for any problem will be a bad thing, especially when the need for creativity or even textbook knowledge comes up.

3

nembajaz t1_j6d3jw5 wrote

Makes sense. However, does AI necessarily have ego? And do we? Maybe that's the next big step for us to understand our true nature. Selection working on consciousness, maybe? Sounds like hopium, I see... :)

0

A1pH4W01v t1_j6d7xb4 wrote

"Ah but you see AI doesnt have ego" my brother in christ we're at a phase where people are calling themselves experts for typing a single sentence to an AI is what i mean.

2

nembajaz t1_j6d8fqh wrote

I asked you all: does it necessarily have an ego?

Not equal with your statement. Just a "what if".

2

A1pH4W01v t1_j6dntbo wrote

It doesnt have one now, but i'd never wanna know what happens if AI does gain an egotistical consciousness.

But in the end, im still talking about is the problem of human beings exploiting AI in order to gain a status that isnt earned.

2

nembajaz t1_j6drb4u wrote

Okay, finally, I understand. I don't think we're hopeless, but of course, it's a close call, smartest way is care, as always. Just trying to say: don't forget the "goal", or at least the hope, this is how the good way can gain some power. Yes, I'm from Marvel... :P

2

taralundrigan t1_j6d8gmw wrote

Imagine thinking AI is actually going to give people more time to live their life. What world are you living in? Since when has automation actually done anything to stop people from being wage slaves or prevented the insane amount of wealth inequality we are experiencing today?

3

nembajaz t1_j6d92gq wrote

"More time" doesn't equal "no classic human work here". If it starts to be a thing, some should learn to stay on roll somehow, that's true. Maybe true slaves will be those who "normally" can't live without destruction, nobody knows.

2

rogert2 t1_j6f6ppy wrote

You're mis-describing the situation.

Who is building AI? Giant tech companies, which are owned by extremely wealthy people. It is their wishes that matter, because they literally give the orders. "Whoever pays the piper calls the tune."

Giant tech companies spend a lot of their money paying for salaries and gig developers. They wish they could spend less money on those things, because then a much larger share of their revenue could be profit.

Teaching AI to write is an obvious step toward not having to pay humans.

Nobody said "I want to be dependent on AI." What they are saying, what they have been saying, shouting at the top of their lungs every single day for decades, is "I hate paying my employees, I hate having to pay them a fair wage, I hate having to pay for their benefits, I hate having to hire additional people to manage all the employees I hate paying, and I hate that wielding all my power requires me to persuade and negotiate with these humans instead of simply dictating."

They will not stop until they reach the ideal workforce size: 1 employee, who they can just give orders to, and then that employee does the "gruntwork" of wielding huge technology to accomplish the mission.

3

spoilingattack t1_j6h1vqq wrote

Whew. Take a breath dude. I think you are somewhat correct but you’d be better served by making a more modest argument. No tech giant will ever be down to 1 employee. I assume you mean that for dramatic effect.

1