Maybe we could make a system where human people submit questions and humans can upvote and downvote these questions to help crowdsource the most important questions and humans could also respond with comments in threads takes bong rip and here me out those comments themselves could be subject to upvotes and downvotes that humans could further use to help elucidate the range of opinions of people involved in a digital community about a question or bit of news.
Then if people still wanted to train LLM’s off the data of those conversations (I don’t to be clear, I want to converse with humans not chatbots), some kind of ethical and explicit framework could be set up so nobody feels bamboozled into being sucked into a torture nexus, this seems like an all around pretty reasonable solution right?
NAH
Surely the solution is AI but smarter and with more stuff!!! Human intelligence is obsolete in most respects!!
That works well when you have time and the right humans with the right knowledge happen to be frequenting the space. In a lot of cases, I have seen that system used to offload the research burden onto somebody else. Those spaces have been increasingly taken over by bots, astroturfing, or armchair ‘experts’ presenting mis/disinformation or parroting something they saw on Youtube out if context.
Yeah, this is why smart, community informed architecture is so important and difficult to get right, and it is also why corporate social media is a terrible idea/business if you care about the health of the communities on it.
To be honest though, old reddit was a great source of information before monetization became the focus, so is the fediverse, yes you have to be extremely skeptical of course you do but in my experience my interactions on the fediverse the vast majority are clearly with human beings.
I just don’t need that level of depth for every query, when I want tacos near me a map with indexed keywords is more than enough.
Here you expose how little you have thought about the constant need for human curators/gardiners of spatial GIS data, there is no robotic shortcut, human beings have to maintain those systems with accounts that have histories that establish their general intent is genuine, which doesn’t mean you can trust the map 100% but it does mean it wasn’t hallucinated out of thin air by an AI.
The natural world does not come with a quantified representation of itself, but we are constantly awash in so much data that we forget that it must come from someone with their own interests, flaws, and ideologies, no matter what they claim, or how much computation they put it through.
Removed by mod
Maybe we could make a system where human people submit questions and humans can upvote and downvote these questions to help crowdsource the most important questions and humans could also respond with comments in threads takes bong rip and here me out those comments themselves could be subject to upvotes and downvotes that humans could further use to help elucidate the range of opinions of people involved in a digital community about a question or bit of news.
Then if people still wanted to train LLM’s off the data of those conversations (I don’t to be clear, I want to converse with humans not chatbots), some kind of ethical and explicit framework could be set up so nobody feels bamboozled into being sucked into a torture nexus, this seems like an all around pretty reasonable solution right?
NAH
Surely the solution is AI but smarter and with more stuff!!! Human intelligence is obsolete in most respects!!
[Closed and marked as duplicate]
Removed by mod
Yeah, this is why smart, community informed architecture is so important and difficult to get right, and it is also why corporate social media is a terrible idea/business if you care about the health of the communities on it.
To be honest though, old reddit was a great source of information before monetization became the focus, so is the fediverse, yes you have to be extremely skeptical of course you do but in my experience my interactions on the fediverse the vast majority are clearly with human beings.
Here you expose how little you have thought about the constant need for human curators/gardiners of spatial GIS data, there is no robotic shortcut, human beings have to maintain those systems with accounts that have histories that establish their general intent is genuine, which doesn’t mean you can trust the map 100% but it does mean it wasn’t hallucinated out of thin air by an AI.
https://theluddite.org/post/spectacle-of-computation.html
Removed by mod
this isn’t interesting
Removed by mod