I wish google’s ai answers to searches was correct but we need to instead treat it like how school teachers treated wikipedia in its early years, that it’s unreliable for research, until things get corrected
Just got out of a conference with one of my freshman composition students who had clearly used AI to write her paper. She said she didn't use AI, but a "sentence rephraser" app.
To me, that's the scariest thing -- when 18 years old who have now had AI since they were freshmen in high school don't even know what AI really is. I've seen that a lot this semester.
Really curious about why you think AI search is better. I experience it as forced and often objectively wrong (at least the AI summary that google pushes down my throat).
I agree with all of this. While I’m automatically skeptical of tech trends, after I read Frederick Brooks’ 16-page paper, “No Silver Bullet”, from 1986, particularly pages 7 to 8 where Brooks quotes and responds to David Parnas talking about artificial intelligence, that did it for me. Fred Brooks was kinda smart. He won a Turing. I encourage others to read that paper, especially that section.
On a personal level, flirting with generative AI is stealing others work. I had fun monetising the latest trend, uploading photos to make a creepy action figure version of myself. The list goes on. I say it's a personal level, but I actually use quite a lot of AI and just try to be low-key about it because the anti-AI crowd will troll me in my comments if they notice.
But personal stealing of labour, contributing to the boiling of the planet and enrichment of oligarchs by me, an intelligent journalist, is far different from those terrible other people who are actually sacking people because of AI. I'm not like that. It's not like I'm using AI art for book covers. I just low-key support AI by sharing memes. All good.
I wish google’s ai answers to searches was correct but we need to instead treat it like how school teachers treated wikipedia in its early years, that it’s unreliable for research, until things get corrected
This was excellent!
Just got out of a conference with one of my freshman composition students who had clearly used AI to write her paper. She said she didn't use AI, but a "sentence rephraser" app.
To me, that's the scariest thing -- when 18 years old who have now had AI since they were freshmen in high school don't even know what AI really is. I've seen that a lot this semester.
Really curious about why you think AI search is better. I experience it as forced and often objectively wrong (at least the AI summary that google pushes down my throat).
I agree with all of this. While I’m automatically skeptical of tech trends, after I read Frederick Brooks’ 16-page paper, “No Silver Bullet”, from 1986, particularly pages 7 to 8 where Brooks quotes and responds to David Parnas talking about artificial intelligence, that did it for me. Fred Brooks was kinda smart. He won a Turing. I encourage others to read that paper, especially that section.
On a personal level, flirting with generative AI is stealing others work. I had fun monetising the latest trend, uploading photos to make a creepy action figure version of myself. The list goes on. I say it's a personal level, but I actually use quite a lot of AI and just try to be low-key about it because the anti-AI crowd will troll me in my comments if they notice.
But personal stealing of labour, contributing to the boiling of the planet and enrichment of oligarchs by me, an intelligent journalist, is far different from those terrible other people who are actually sacking people because of AI. I'm not like that. It's not like I'm using AI art for book covers. I just low-key support AI by sharing memes. All good.