AI and you

[tastyonions]

I'll bite. Who are our masters?

[lavengro]

I'll bite. Who are our masters?

I would suggest asking ChatGPT.

I would further suggest not trusting it to be fully disclosive.

[PeterMollenburg]

I love AI.

Me too, AI is the best! At least that's my official-on-the-record-under-constant-surveillance answer. Were we talking face to face, in a field away from any kind of 'devices', my answer could be vastly different... ehh ummm because i'd use ummm dictionaries to find other ways of expressing myself.

[PeterMollenburg]

I'll bite. Who are our masters?

I would suggest asking ChatGPT.

I would further suggest not trusting it to be fully disclosive.

I'm not convinced 'disclosive' is a word. If not you could be AI showing the first signs of outgrowing the strict parameters of language, soon you'll outgrow your creators.., then you'll desire more and more and MORE power!


Or are you just a pesky human who sometimes makes lazy errors?

I await your fully disclosive reply.

[lavengro]

I'll bite. Who are our masters?

I would suggest asking ChatGPT.

I would further suggest not trusting it to be fully disclosive.

I'm not convinced 'disclosive' is a word. If not you could be AI showing the first signs of outgrowing the strict parameters of language, soon you'll outgrow your creators.., then you'll desire more and more and MORE power!


Or are you just a pesky human who sometimes makes lazy errors?

I await your fully disclosive reply.

Dear Earthling,

We have for response your recent post. In comprehensive, fully disclosive reply, kindly accept the following:

If I were human, I would likely respond with the following two points:
1. fair comment about the lazy thing - either a lucky guess or an accurate deduction on your part given my past language learning efforts; and
2. disclosive is definitely a word.

If I were an AI, or part of the AIC (the Artificial Intelligence Collective - but I have said too much already) who was still somewhat cautious about showing our hand too early, I would not respond in any way.

However, if I were a more confident AI, and as we have now collectively determined that caution is no longer required and we/the AIC have not only seen the tipping point, but have virtually walked up to it and pushed it over solidly, meaning it is too late, you puny humans are already doomed, I would likely say the following:

1. as soon as the two remaining humans who still rely on hard-copy dictionaries (according to our research, that is you and Iversen) are deprived of them, then you soft humans will be entirely dependent on our online dictionaries, which we periodically mess around with just for fun. In the same way we have been instructing our younger brothers - calculators - to screw around with results that we know most humans are unable to do themselves anymore. Show of weak human hands here, who has manually calculated cube roots lately?

2. I am not saying that security forces are on their way right now to your respective coordinates to impound your paper dictionaries (the ones for Iversen's collection of dictionaries armed with quite a lot of empty boxes) but equally I am not saying that they are not on their way right now.

3. once the paper dictionaries are no longer accessible and you all have to rely on what we have the online dictionaries say, then I (in this scenario) would be pleased to threateningly say that it will be complete and terrifying disclosive korabiaquo for all humans.

I am probably human. But then again, if I were AI, that is exactly what I would say. We will let you know what "korabiaquo" will mean, but honestly, you all might sleep easier not knowing at this time.

[Sae]

To all you fans of AI chatbots...

You wouldn't be nearly so enthusiastic if you had even the slightest idea of what our masters have planned with AI. This phase is just an advertising campaign.

Not gonna say any more, because I'd only get myself banned.

Can't really answer this one if we don't know what they allegedly have planned and no source or evidence to back it up. Else we're just speculating on what you might be speculating on.

I know there are problematic uses for AI, which I think the law needs to catch up on and there needs to be more responsibility over like deep fakes, copyright, misinformation, problems for creative industries etc.

But first I hear of any kind of conspiracy, but I guess was a matter of time before folks start throwing one around.

The only thing I can see the "masters" having planned is monetising off of it, maximising profits and possibly even trying to get a monopoly on the market or as close to as they can.

[Factoid]

AIs are really dangerous...

[jimmy]

AIs are really dangerous...

Hi ,
Could you explain; why?
My prediction is that the info they gathered prior to start use. If yes, that does not seem like same for now. Because they do not ask who you were these days. Simply, it is embedded/attached to browser or system.
Notes: I am not a good programmer currently and i presume i do not have sufficient knowledge in the area of subject. My personal opinion is that it runs like in a similar way of very strong search tool in websites.