Victor Squawk
Well-Known Member
Sorry, I was distracted and highly caffeinated when I wrote my prior post so I skipped a lot of steps. I like towing around the architecture of openAI's generative transformer but I find the overblown attention it gets as something absurd.
I wanted to reply to a bunch of posts, but I also want to earn the "ratio" trophy on here and also didn't want to write too many posts so I just read the whole thread and tried to say it all one go...
I'm saying I know how to operate the machine and the better you understand it, the less impressive it gets. And I also think that we, as a world, don't need ai except in fine tuning some idiosyncratic and difficult stuff.
I see it as a virtual machine. You get a license to drive a car, you prove your competence to operate heavy machinery or fly a plane...its like that. Do we use a single machine for everything? I don't see that. So it's just another specialized tool that has low functional value without a human operator.
I do not believe that will ever change. And if I'm ever wrong, everyone and anyone is invited to tell me "I told you so" and I'll even let you gloat about it and won't reproach you for it. I just think its easier to dream about the possibilities the less you understand about it. Alternatively, it's easier to live in a delusion about it the more deeply you are invested in, or integrated with, it.
So that's my nickel in the bucket. Sorry if I sounded sarcastic or dismissive...
As a side note about semiotic technology, isn't it interesting how the Japanese language, the Chinese language and the English language emphasize different scales of semantic value in communication? I'd be curious to see what sort of lingo-tech they each produce.
For example, I bet you could pilot an architecture that communicates in beat-box logic. Can you guess which language (Japanese, Chinese, English) would have the greatest advantage with such a system?
See? I'm a fan of lingo-tech but I just don't like seeing things get overrated or over-favored when other important things are at stake.
I wanted to reply to a bunch of posts, but I also want to earn the "ratio" trophy on here and also didn't want to write too many posts so I just read the whole thread and tried to say it all one go...
I'm saying I know how to operate the machine and the better you understand it, the less impressive it gets. And I also think that we, as a world, don't need ai except in fine tuning some idiosyncratic and difficult stuff.
I see it as a virtual machine. You get a license to drive a car, you prove your competence to operate heavy machinery or fly a plane...its like that. Do we use a single machine for everything? I don't see that. So it's just another specialized tool that has low functional value without a human operator.
I do not believe that will ever change. And if I'm ever wrong, everyone and anyone is invited to tell me "I told you so" and I'll even let you gloat about it and won't reproach you for it. I just think its easier to dream about the possibilities the less you understand about it. Alternatively, it's easier to live in a delusion about it the more deeply you are invested in, or integrated with, it.
So that's my nickel in the bucket. Sorry if I sounded sarcastic or dismissive...
As a side note about semiotic technology, isn't it interesting how the Japanese language, the Chinese language and the English language emphasize different scales of semantic value in communication? I'd be curious to see what sort of lingo-tech they each produce.
For example, I bet you could pilot an architecture that communicates in beat-box logic. Can you guess which language (Japanese, Chinese, English) would have the greatest advantage with such a system?
See? I'm a fan of lingo-tech but I just don't like seeing things get overrated or over-favored when other important things are at stake.
