If Twitter were a person, I would think everything gets more expensive and they have to pay up front, now that they have a reputation for not paying their bills.
Not sure why someone downvoted you. That’s exactly what the term means in this context. It’s those confidently written answers that contain false or fabricated information.
And this seems like the biggest limitation for the LLM approach. The model just knows that a certain set of tokens tends to follow another set of tokens.
It has no understanding of what the tokens represent. So it does a great job of producing sentences that look meaningful, but any actual meaning in them is purely incidental.
Most people just jump from the first “shit wagon on fire” which is Xitter to the next close “shit wagon”. Because it was the new “thing” and all the “influencer” are there 🤚😲🤚.
But Twitter has been massively losing advertisers, and that is what will kill it rather than losing users. Unless Elon goes sunk cost fallacy on us and funds it directly in which case he can keep it alive perpetually.
I had this discussion when chatgpt first blew up. The amount of this kind of stuff will increase, but it has always been there and I strongly doubt it will convince anyone who wasn't already convinced.
But with the larger amount they can manage, they will reach a wider willing audience. Russian propaganda has been incredibly effective and if the bottleneck was humans, that was removed or is being removed.
If I felt like I was forming a “friendship” with one of these artificial personalities, I’d want more control - not in a maniacal way, but because I wouldn’t trust Meta (or whoever) not to say “meh, this isn’t profitable, so we’re shutting it down next month.”
We’re already far too dependent on corporations, but in most cases, they haven’t had the power to emotionally damage us in this specific way. I don’t want to give them that kind of power over me.
You can be your best self by purchasing a subscription to Brawndo recommended by the AI friend guzzling fossil fuels and water in the middle of whatever desert their hardware resides.
I don’t think so. People still have a need for interaction with a real human and infinite generated content just feels hollow. Sure, it’ll satisfy some people and maybe that’s a good thing but I don’t think it’s going to replace or even barely supplement real social interaction
I don’t think it will on a broad scale, but some percentage of people will fall victim to it. It’s just like how only 1% of mobile gamers pay for anything but the percent that does pays a LOT.
I think it will happen. Multiplayer video games already match people with bots that are presented as if they were human players, and 99.9% of players don’t care. As long as a game makes you feel like you’re playing against other humans, most people consider that good enough. Similarly, as long as a bot on Instagram or Twitter feels human enough to be enjoyable to interact with, users won’t care that they aren’t actually human.
It depends much on the game, environment, people involved.
Npc ai has come a far way and the thrill of playing live with people is a real competition. And its only just started to get good enough to intimidate social/emotional behavior.
massive realistic single player historic events, like battlefields - yay
the social aspect of social media and online comments - nah
front and helpdesk assistants, maybe even a certified therapist ai - yea
I’m with you except for the therapist one. Ain’t no way the AI we have currently or anything even close to what we have now could be a therapist. The human connection is the #1 most important thing in therapy and being a therapist takes way too much contextual understanding.
Ai we have now, not so much. But in a few generations?
I have experience with quite a few therapists/psychologist/doctors/psychiatrists and the most common issue i find is that many of them are old and all of them carry human biases. Ai is biased like us but i think there is more room to create more objective reasoning.
platformer.news
Hot