Comment by oncallthrow
8 months ago
It's deeply sad to me that I will never again be able to read a message from someone and know, for sure, that it was written by them themselves.
8 months ago
It's deeply sad to me that I will never again be able to read a message from someone and know, for sure, that it was written by them themselves.
We will have a web where proof of humanity is the de facto standard. Its only a question of when. Things have to get worse before they get better in afraid
How would that help? Plenty of humans will just continue to be willing AI-proxies.
It would raise the barrier to entry, I suppose. I agree with GP that at some point in the future, real human output will become more rare and more valuable. And pure "human made" content (movies, music, books, blog posts, comments, etc.) may have access controls or costs associated.
We're already seeing the social contract around hosting your own blog change due to the constant indexing from AI crawlers.
Yes they will and they're reputation will be toggled accordingly within the community. When they're trustworthiness becomes questionable they'll feel the trade off of using AI and that will become a closed loop feedback.
Though that is an optimistic steady state, I still think we're going to see a lot more of "my AI talking to your AI" to some unhealthy degree
There's still a sort of web of trust. All you have to do is find people who you really trust and hate AI. For instance, people who know me know that there's no way in hell that I'd ever use any sort of generative AI, for anything.
I'm guessing that you've never actually lived in that world...
When I got squggily written cursive letters from my grandma I could be pretty sure those were her words though up by herself, for the effort to accurately reproduce the consistent mess she made would have been great. But the moment we moved to the typewriter and then other digital means uniformly printed out on paper or screens you've really just assumed that it was written by the human you were expecting.
Furthermore, the vast majority of communications done in business long before now were not done by 'people' per say. They were done by processes. In the vast majority of business email that I type out there is a large amount of process that would not occur if I were talking to a friend. Moreso this communication is facilitative to some other end goal. If the entire process that existed could be automated away humanity would be better off as some mostly useless work would be eliminated.
Do you know why people are so willing to use AI to communicate with each other? Because at the end of the day they don't give two shits about communicating with you. It's an end goal of receiving a paycheck. There is no passion, no deep interest, no entertainment for them in doing so. It's a process demanded of them because of how we integrate Moloch into our modern lives.
If you come to the LLM with your message, and then use the LLM to iterate drafts and tighten your prose, then no, the exercise was exactly the opposite of a disrespect to the reader.
Sending half-baked, run-on, unvetted writing, when you easily could have chosen otherwise, is in fact the disrespectful choice.
Why would I want everyone who talks to me to sound like a clone of the same vapid robot?
I would avoid that world at any cost of I was allowed a choice, but the point is that it's used as a weapon against you. Consent appears to be unnecessary.
4 replies →
You can if you can watch them write it :)
You have to watch them do it IRL because the video feed can also be generated now.
Give it a few decades and they'll be ghost hacking your optical circuits Ghost in the Shell style.