We don't have enough people gambling to make this casino profitable. Thats why we are moving the same $$$ around the big three casinos. Don't worry, its all legit.
My guess is they are referring to the christian book series about the rapture. Some movies got made out of them. At least one was starring Kirk Cameron
My wife is Chinese, she watches so much dramas written by Chinese AI.
America is already behind.
Your American AI companies are taking all the money and pissing it away (You're all aware of this..I wasn't telling you I was just continuing my point).
China has AI that is doing so much.. But then they're still investing in solar power.
American politicians only care about funding the terrorist state of Israel.
China actually is creating the future.
I also hate looking at my wife's phone and seeing a historical drama that looks mostly accurate then part way through gives a weird look.
I'm not from England and I know that nonce means pedo.
I hate that because I'd love to call my mates w Nonce and mean it as someone who has no god damned idea what they're talking about..
I'd use it like "You nonce cunt.. Of course 2+2=4"
I've got other words for my mates so I'll live without it.
Calling your mates a nonce isn't entirely unreasonable here, it depends a lot on context. If you would call them a cunt, you could probably call them a nonce if there is context for it to be funny.
Nonce cunt sounds odd though. Nonce and cunt kinda take the same place in the sentence so its one or the other. Fucking nonce, fucking cunt both work. You could probably go for noncey cunt.
Also if you are in your teens literally any insult regardless of how logical it is, can be used on your mates.
Oh god, my wife is the same. She used to watch endless historical drama and I already thought they all blended into one another... For people who don't know, they have like 52 episodes per season.
But now with AI I think it's gonna be like freaking Eastenders and the like, with episodes every day or something. And I'm not sure she even notices or cares...
AI is like nuclear : amazing science in the hands of complete sociopaths. It's gonna be great.
The slot machine companies say the slot machines are getting way too good, but too good to release. They say people should keep using the machines but they should slow down development, so that they can release slots that won't be as good but will be "safe". All the slot companies agree at the same time, and definitely wouldn't release the best slot machine if it weren't so dangerous.
It's about slot machines. Came-on, it's right there on the post.
Now excuse me, I have to try some 10 prompts on that great code generator right there, with some luck I'll get some incredible delta to push into the repository.
The definition of a soul will entirely depend on your personal religious beliefs. I'm pretty sure in the case of Anthropic trying to convince people that Claude has a soul, they were using the Judeo-Christian version that is the part of you that is you and that will continue on after your death into the afterlife.
I think it's safe to say any talk of LLMs having 'souls' is basically smuggling Descartes in through the back door. To be honest I think this of all claims intelligence is substrate-independent.
Do you mean brain matter? Electrochemical reactions? The concept of emerging phenomena? I don't think there is the thing that gives me consciousness, I don't believe it can exist even.
I don't think I've ever heard of a soul being referred to as the thing that grants consciousness. If anything, that is a much lower bar for AI to achieve than the functionally impossible-to-achieve "immaterial and immortal part of the body that will live on in heaven, gifted to you by god".
It might be interesting to explore views of the soul outside of Western religion. I would agree that the soul is immaterial, though the immortal part I obviously can’t be sure about.
The thing is, science is still puzzled as to what consciousness even is or why we have it. Philosophically speaking, you can even argue that science is fundamentally unable to answer those questions, because science relies on observation and we cannot observe the consciousness of other humans, only ourselves. From what we know, it seems to be immaterial with an ability to influence the physical world that defies explanation (see how the observer in quantum physics is responsible for collapsing the wave function, but nobody can identify what constitutes observation beyond whatever information can reach us—whoever “us” is in that equation).
So yeah, I’ll grant you it’s easier to achieve than a religious definition, but I would be very curious to see AI replicate that :)
It's an interesting conflation but I don't really see them as the same.
We can measure brain activity and see what responses there are to what stimuli. Similarly we can query a neural network for the same.
I would say a dog is conscious. I would say a tree or a coral is probably not conscious, so to speak. Depending on your view of life, it could be possible to say they all have a soul, or none of them have a soul because only humans do.
We can probably make a computer that is conscious, and it is probably not that far away. There isn't really anything that is truly special about human consciousness, in my view.
From a purely mechanical point of view, if you believe in souls, there is some threshold that must be overcome. If you simulate a human brain 1:1, does it have a soul? If you grow a human brain without a body, does it have a soul?
For the sake of argument, how would you even determine a tree is conscious or not?
Take an oak tree, there's an oak in Berkshire that's probably around 1,500 years old. From its perspective of time, it'd be this moving, writhing thing as it grows its branches and roots in all directions and we'd be moving so fast we'd be beneath its notice; basically what fruit flies are to us. The thing operates on a totally different timescale to us, and while we might not consider a single tree relevant here a forest does form a chemical network where nutrients may be shared with neighbours; while neither is likely to possess any kind of consciousness we would understand as such, I would sooner look for it in trees or mycelium than I would in great piles of linear algebra.
Yeah, I would consider dogs conscious too, and I suspect all life is, including plants and fungi. I don’t see us making computers with conscious abilities though. Just the fact that there is activity doesn’t define consciousness, it also requires awareness, the experience of being alive.
Does fungi have that? I dunno, and if it does it would have vastly different experiences from us, but I’m pretty sure a computer does not. Maybe it’s because we understand computers too well, or maybe it really is something special to organic matter. What about a computer that has organic parts for entropy as input to its algorithms… I also don’t know 😅
The brain is our thinking device, but ultimately it’s “just” a clever piece of meat. But consciousness is something that exists outside the dimensions of space and time, yet is able to influence those dimensions. A higher-order dimension, if you will. That’s maybe a bit of a spiritually elusive way to frame it, but that’s because science cannot explain it either.
Science knows there are other dimensions. Quantum physics proves this with entanglement and the particle-wave duality. Within quantum physics there is also the “magical” notion of the observer, where nobody knows exactly how to define what an observer. It seems linked to consciousness, but some people get very angry if you suggest that, because we cannot prove it and it breaks their illusion that physical reality is all there is.
Anyway, if you are in the camp that thinks there is nothing beyond physical, then sure, it’s the brain. But if you’re a bit more open minded, then it’s also more than just the brain.
consciousness is something that exists outside the dimensions of space and time
That's absolutely, demonstrably incorrect. It, like all the other processes, is something that exists in observable space-time dimensions that we can observe. It's a state of matter observable over time. There is no way and no reason to add some more shit on top of that.
there is also the “magical” notion of the observer
It's only magic if you don't know what probability is. If we have two marbles, black and white, and blindly take one each and go on our merry ways, and then you need to do the full math about it for some reason, it's very useful to you to describe a marble in my hand as a 50% black/ 50% white marble. Then later if you look at the one you have, and discover that it's a white one, the one I have magically, instantly, inexplicably becomes 100% black marble. That's what, simplifying a lot, a quantum effect is (this specific one is quantum entanglement). And if you forget that nothing actually changed, and it's just you scribbling some math on a paper, you can start thinking about it in terms of reality bending multidimensional paradoxes. But it's not, it's just humans being unable to easily comprehend insanely complex mathematical abstractions.
That's absolutely, demonstrably incorrect. It, like all the other processes, is something that exists in observable space-time dimensions that we can observe. It's a state of matter observable over time.
Do you have some source for that? Would love to see how you measure that?
[…] That's what, simplifying a lot, a quantum effect is
You’re also entirely ignoring the part where matter stops behaving as matter and starts interacting with itself as if you had the white and black marble in your hands at the same time, despite you only having one. This is the “magical” part, because it depends on the presence of the observer whether this effect happens or not.
Do you have some source for that? Would love to see how you measure that?
That's the thing. You are the one adding an additional entity on top the reality, so you should be the one providing sources for it. We know what a brain is, we roughly know how it operates, we know that if we measure electrical activity we have perfectly working predicting theory, we can stick a person into an FMRA machine, prod a specific part of the brain and make them see purple, flail hands, or hear voices. Now, if you want to reintroduce old discarded theory of a soul into all that, it's your job to find where it fits and find any way that it will work.
My sources for it is the last century or so of the brain science.
You’re also entirely ignoring the part
Because this part doesn't exist. It's hard to overstate how much all of this is just math.
The whole observer effect stems from the fact that we can't measure quantum particles directly on account of it being too small, so we don't have a way to know anything about them until we or something else interacts with them, usually in quite destructive ways. So in order for our math to exist, we abstract it away and talk about shit like 0.5 spin like it's something that can make any sense in real life, just because nobody needs to explain every time that we're talking about probability of an abstract particle in specific conditions. Because, again, we can only measure its, for example, speed by the fact that it smashed into something else with a specific force, and as you can imagine, its speed after that is quite different.
If we return to the marble example, if my only way to tell a colour of it was to smash it to bits, we can say that the marble is in the state of black-white, but when I measure it, it changes the state to was-black-now-smashed-into-bits, thus demonstrating the observer effect. We can say that because we did a bunch of math and now we need a special black-white state of matter to make our probabilistic equations make sense. But without that, we stop at the black-white state and don't go any further, because it's not a thing that actually real.
But do you have an alternative explanation? Because without one, I have no alternative but to admit there must be something more, regardless of whether you wish to call it a dimension or something else.
What we do know however, is that entanglement is not constrained to the dimensions of time and space. So the existence of additional dimensions seems a rather logical leap, even if indeed technically speculation, because we don’t know how they work.
Unfortunately yes I live there, and it sucks and it's so far behind the rest of the developed world, but at least on paper, things with souls have a bare minimum of rights. Even if those aren't always respected, corporations at least need to make it look on paper like they are
Okay then if it's convicted of a crime then it can legally be compelled to work for free? Otherwise, if they're claiming it has a soul, then that means they need to compensate it for its labor and allow it to quit if it chooses.
Note: I'm not saying it has a soul. I'm just saying if they follow their own logic, then that's what would be required.
If all the microbes in your gut stopped touching you, you would also stop doing anything.
Your actual drive and reason and purpose is driven by chemical reactions in a mass of meat. If you want to refer to your brain then do so, but don't start redefining words to paranormal things just to get people to say that the paranormal stuff is real. Your soul does not exist.
The only thing that interferes with this metaphor is that most people agree slot machines must be capable of actually doing what the manufacturers claim they can, and they have to let someone win once in a while.
There are multiple places where the analogy falls apart.
Executives aren't using slot machines as a reason to fire thousands. Artists' jobs aren't being taken by slot machines. People aren't posting about slot machines every single day on social media.
I do not like takes like this. AI companies are, of course, garbage. But you can build great things with their technology. So posting some memes saying that every AI product is useless like a slot machine is kind of blind to the capabilities of what you can do with them. It's like all those old people back then telling everybody that they do not need computers and that computers suck or that the internet is bad and you should read a book.
It has been used in science for the last couple of decades in order to automate things that are too tedious to do by hand. Protein folding and mathematical equations come to mind.
I cant think of a single thing they can build in the hands of a crazed idiot that wouldnt be better built in the hands of a trained professional.
Ai should, at most, be used to automate tedious, low risk work that anyone in the field could do, but would rather avoid. Examples like protein folding or brute forcing math proofs, really just things that can easily be programmed but are more grunt busywork than anything.
It should NOT be used for developing new features in code, discovering or finalizing math proofs, and most certainly, human expression via art.
Ai's exclusive use should be to free humans to pursue passions, either by reducing work hours or tedium, ideally both.
The thing is the trained professional costs 300k a year (100k in low-income areas like Europe) to employ and a z.ai coding plan sub lowest tier is like 20 bucks a month and makes a ton of mistakes but works at least 10x faster so you get much faster iteration.
Well, a slot machine can actually be a pretty nice arcane cabinet, if you remove all the gambling software, add a little more buttons to it. It doesn't actually make slot machines any more redeemable.
But even beyound that, it increasingly looks like all the meager benefits that llm provides is outweighed by enormous downsides of using llm, both on personal, and on societal level. This is not saying anything about other theory-free inference products, but that's not what we call AI anymore, so that point is moot.
83 replies
LETS GO GAMBLING!
We don't have enough people gambling to make this casino profitable. Thats why we are moving the same $$$ around the big three casinos. Don't worry, its all legit.
What does "left behind" even mean? Honestly, it sounds nice.
My guess is they are referring to the christian book series about the rapture. Some movies got made out of them. At least one was starring Kirk Cameron
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_Behind
This but ai
Make a new hat make no mistakes!!
Processed food is a better analogy.
"Nobody knows how the slot machines work or where all the prize money comes from, not even the people making them."
12 giu
Chinese AI is already better..
My wife is Chinese, she watches so much dramas written by Chinese AI. America is already behind.
Your American AI companies are taking all the money and pissing it away (You're all aware of this..I wasn't telling you I was just continuing my point).
China has AI that is doing so much.. But then they're still investing in solar power.
American politicians only care about funding the terrorist state of Israel.
China actually is creating the future.
I also hate looking at my wife's phone and seeing a historical drama that looks mostly accurate then part way through gives a weird look.
I hate AI in every form.
People also watching a bunch of American generated bullshit, it says more about the state or people's minds than to quality of generators.
Its not the only evil they are care about. They also protect nonces.
Yes, they do that too sadly.
I'm not from England and I know that nonce means pedo. I hate that because I'd love to call my mates w Nonce and mean it as someone who has no god damned idea what they're talking about..
I'd use it like "You nonce cunt.. Of course 2+2=4" I've got other words for my mates so I'll live without it.
Calling your mates a nonce isn't entirely unreasonable here, it depends a lot on context. If you would call them a cunt, you could probably call them a nonce if there is context for it to be funny.
Nonce cunt sounds odd though. Nonce and cunt kinda take the same place in the sentence so its one or the other. Fucking nonce, fucking cunt both work. You could probably go for noncey cunt.
Also if you are in your teens literally any insult regardless of how logical it is, can be used on your mates.
Hahaha well that's a reality check being asked if I'm in my teens. My mates and I are all in our late 30's we just get along through insults.
Noncey cunt sounds perfect, I shall call him that the next time I see him in person.
Oh god, my wife is the same. She used to watch endless historical drama and I already thought they all blended into one another... For people who don't know, they have like 52 episodes per season.
But now with AI I think it's gonna be like freaking Eastenders and the like, with episodes every day or something. And I'm not sure she even notices or cares...
AI is like nuclear : amazing science in the hands of complete sociopaths. It's gonna be great.
Yeah the AI dramas can actually look real sometimes too. But it's all just still weird and very annoying.
The slot machine companies say the slot machines are getting way too good, but too good to release. They say people should keep using the machines but they should slow down development, so that they can release slots that won't be as good but will be "safe". All the slot companies agree at the same time, and definitely wouldn't release the best slot machine if it weren't so dangerous.
Your talking about ai aren’t you…..
Anthropic tried to convince scholars and religious leader Claude had a soul. They told him to get stuffed.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/29/us/anthropic-claude-morals-ai.html
https://archive.is/y8FW0
I'm both angry and disappointed the next global economic meltdown is going to be caused by these clowns giving themselves ELIZA syndrome.
That's a deep cut
I mean, you need dumb ass takes to convince dumb asses.
If you believe in a soul, then convincing them a rock has a soul is a compelling argument.
I believe the AI’s has souls just like humans do, meaning none. That doesn’t mean I value electronics and programming like I value living organisms.
It's about slot machines. Came-on, it's right there on the post.
Now excuse me, I have to try some 10 prompts on that great code generator right there, with some luck I'll get some incredible delta to push into the repository.
What even is a soul, when you get right down to it? Convince me that humans have a soul.
The definition of a soul will entirely depend on your personal religious beliefs. I'm pretty sure in the case of Anthropic trying to convince people that Claude has a soul, they were using the Judeo-Christian version that is the part of you that is you and that will continue on after your death into the afterlife.
Claude certainly does not have that.
I think it's safe to say any talk of LLMs having 'souls' is basically smuggling Descartes in through the back door. To be honest I think this of all claims intelligence is substrate-independent.
It’s the thing that grants you consciousness. You do have consciousness, don’t you?
Do you mean brain matter? Electrochemical reactions? The concept of emerging phenomena? I don't think there is the thing that gives me consciousness, I don't believe it can exist even.
I don't think I've ever heard of a soul being referred to as the thing that grants consciousness. If anything, that is a much lower bar for AI to achieve than the functionally impossible-to-achieve "immaterial and immortal part of the body that will live on in heaven, gifted to you by god".
It might be interesting to explore views of the soul outside of Western religion. I would agree that the soul is immaterial, though the immortal part I obviously can’t be sure about.
The thing is, science is still puzzled as to what consciousness even is or why we have it. Philosophically speaking, you can even argue that science is fundamentally unable to answer those questions, because science relies on observation and we cannot observe the consciousness of other humans, only ourselves. From what we know, it seems to be immaterial with an ability to influence the physical world that defies explanation (see how the observer in quantum physics is responsible for collapsing the wave function, but nobody can identify what constitutes observation beyond whatever information can reach us—whoever “us” is in that equation).
So yeah, I’ll grant you it’s easier to achieve than a religious definition, but I would be very curious to see AI replicate that :)
It's an interesting conflation but I don't really see them as the same.
We can measure brain activity and see what responses there are to what stimuli. Similarly we can query a neural network for the same.
I would say a dog is conscious. I would say a tree or a coral is probably not conscious, so to speak. Depending on your view of life, it could be possible to say they all have a soul, or none of them have a soul because only humans do.
We can probably make a computer that is conscious, and it is probably not that far away. There isn't really anything that is truly special about human consciousness, in my view.
From a purely mechanical point of view, if you believe in souls, there is some threshold that must be overcome. If you simulate a human brain 1:1, does it have a soul? If you grow a human brain without a body, does it have a soul?
For the sake of argument, how would you even determine a tree is conscious or not?
Take an oak tree, there's an oak in Berkshire that's probably around 1,500 years old. From its perspective of time, it'd be this moving, writhing thing as it grows its branches and roots in all directions and we'd be moving so fast we'd be beneath its notice; basically what fruit flies are to us. The thing operates on a totally different timescale to us, and while we might not consider a single tree relevant here a forest does form a chemical network where nutrients may be shared with neighbours; while neither is likely to possess any kind of consciousness we would understand as such, I would sooner look for it in trees or mycelium than I would in great piles of linear algebra.
Yeah, I would consider dogs conscious too, and I suspect all life is, including plants and fungi. I don’t see us making computers with conscious abilities though. Just the fact that there is activity doesn’t define consciousness, it also requires awareness, the experience of being alive.
Does fungi have that? I dunno, and if it does it would have vastly different experiences from us, but I’m pretty sure a computer does not. Maybe it’s because we understand computers too well, or maybe it really is something special to organic matter. What about a computer that has organic parts for entropy as input to its algorithms… I also don’t know 😅
Consciousness =/= a soul, and is nevertheless an equally nebulous concept. Unconvinced.
I didn’t mean to imply they’re the same thing. I responded with some more depths to the other replies.
I though that was the brain
The brain is our thinking device, but ultimately it’s “just” a clever piece of meat. But consciousness is something that exists outside the dimensions of space and time, yet is able to influence those dimensions. A higher-order dimension, if you will. That’s maybe a bit of a spiritually elusive way to frame it, but that’s because science cannot explain it either.
Science knows there are other dimensions. Quantum physics proves this with entanglement and the particle-wave duality. Within quantum physics there is also the “magical” notion of the observer, where nobody knows exactly how to define what an observer. It seems linked to consciousness, but some people get very angry if you suggest that, because we cannot prove it and it breaks their illusion that physical reality is all there is.
Anyway, if you are in the camp that thinks there is nothing beyond physical, then sure, it’s the brain. But if you’re a bit more open minded, then it’s also more than just the brain.
That's absolutely, demonstrably incorrect. It, like all the other processes, is something that exists in observable space-time dimensions that we can observe. It's a state of matter observable over time. There is no way and no reason to add some more shit on top of that.
It's only magic if you don't know what probability is. If we have two marbles, black and white, and blindly take one each and go on our merry ways, and then you need to do the full math about it for some reason, it's very useful to you to describe a marble in my hand as a 50% black/ 50% white marble. Then later if you look at the one you have, and discover that it's a white one, the one I have magically, instantly, inexplicably becomes 100% black marble. That's what, simplifying a lot, a quantum effect is (this specific one is quantum entanglement). And if you forget that nothing actually changed, and it's just you scribbling some math on a paper, you can start thinking about it in terms of reality bending multidimensional paradoxes. But it's not, it's just humans being unable to easily comprehend insanely complex mathematical abstractions.
Do you have some source for that? Would love to see how you measure that?
You’re also entirely ignoring the part where matter stops behaving as matter and starts interacting with itself as if you had the white and black marble in your hands at the same time, despite you only having one. This is the “magical” part, because it depends on the presence of the observer whether this effect happens or not.
That's the thing. You are the one adding an additional entity on top the reality, so you should be the one providing sources for it. We know what a brain is, we roughly know how it operates, we know that if we measure electrical activity we have perfectly working predicting theory, we can stick a person into an FMRA machine, prod a specific part of the brain and make them see purple, flail hands, or hear voices. Now, if you want to reintroduce old discarded theory of a soul into all that, it's your job to find where it fits and find any way that it will work.
My sources for it is the last century or so of the brain science.
Because this part doesn't exist. It's hard to overstate how much all of this is just math.
The whole observer effect stems from the fact that we can't measure quantum particles directly on account of it being too small, so we don't have a way to know anything about them until we or something else interacts with them, usually in quite destructive ways. So in order for our math to exist, we abstract it away and talk about shit like 0.5 spin like it's something that can make any sense in real life, just because nobody needs to explain every time that we're talking about probability of an abstract particle in specific conditions. Because, again, we can only measure its, for example, speed by the fact that it smashed into something else with a specific force, and as you can imagine, its speed after that is quite different.
If we return to the marble example, if my only way to tell a colour of it was to smash it to bits, we can say that the marble is in the state of black-white, but when I measure it, it changes the state to was-black-now-smashed-into-bits, thus demonstrating the observer effect. We can say that because we did a bunch of math and now we need a special black-white state of matter to make our probabilistic equations make sense. But without that, we stop at the black-white state and don't go any further, because it's not a thing that actually real.
Other dimensions are just speculation, just like all the rest.
But do you have an alternative explanation? Because without one, I have no alternative but to admit there must be something more, regardless of whether you wish to call it a dimension or something else.
What we do know however, is that entanglement is not constrained to the dimensions of time and space. So the existence of additional dimensions seems a rather logical leap, even if indeed technically speculation, because we don’t know how they work.
We dont know any of that, this is more sales pitch than science.
If it has a soul then wouldn't that mean they have to grant it rights such as no forced labor, PTO, &c...
Have you been to the US? Or read about it?
Unfortunately yes I live there, and it sucks and it's so far behind the rest of the developed world, but at least on paper, things with souls have a bare minimum of rights. Even if those aren't always respected, corporations at least need to make it look on paper like they are
Forced Labor is literally in the constitution, PTO isn't (nor anywhere else).
Okay then if it's convicted of a crime then it can legally be compelled to work for free? Otherwise, if they're claiming it has a soul, then that means they need to compensate it for its labor and allow it to quit if it chooses.
Note: I'm not saying it has a soul. I'm just saying if they follow their own logic, then that's what would be required.
It's not like humans have should either
It's a chatbot that can run a few scripts and Google search. Essentially long form Google. It has no more a soul than the dewey decimal system.
Now, don't denigrate the dewey decimal system. It's a beloved institution.
How dare you! Anthropic has it's own search API, Claude doesn't need Google ('s API)
It has no more soul than a human’s mess of neurons and action potentials.
Maybe some mess of neurons and action potentials are a little fancier than yours so that's why you don't get it
Good point. You think better, therefore you know you’re actually a supernatural ghost driving your body like a mech suit. I defer to your intellect.
Maybe soul has more meaning that "supernatural ghost" and more like, "actual drive and reason and purpose."
If everyone stopped touching AI, it would stop doing anything. It is not even alive.
If all the microbes in your gut stopped touching you, you would also stop doing anything.
Your actual drive and reason and purpose is driven by chemical reactions in a mass of meat. If you want to refer to your brain then do so, but don't start redefining words to paranormal things just to get people to say that the paranormal stuff is real. Your soul does not exist.
It does not though.
Then go marry AI or something since you're so compatible. My mech suit and I are a little too refined for hollow riffraff like you.
If someone is torturing them, they are just programs. If they want money from religious people, it has a soul.
I think these specific people believe in the machine spirit at all times, at least a lot of them are rationalist cultists
The only thing that interferes with this metaphor is that most people agree slot machines must be capable of actually doing what the manufacturers claim they can, and they have to let someone win once in a while.
There are multiple places where the analogy falls apart.
Executives aren't using slot machines as a reason to fire thousands. Artists' jobs aren't being taken by slot machines. People aren't posting about slot machines every single day on social media.
Substitute loot boxes then.
I do not like takes like this. AI companies are, of course, garbage. But you can build great things with their technology. So posting some memes saying that every AI product is useless like a slot machine is kind of blind to the capabilities of what you can do with them. It's like all those old people back then telling everybody that they do not need computers and that computers suck or that the internet is bad and you should read a book.
Do tell.
You can generate a picture of sonic the hedgehog with giant tits, and not pay a single artist for it. Isn't it fucking great?
AI is more than just LLMs or image generation.
It has been used in science for the last couple of decades in order to automate things that are too tedious to do by hand. Protein folding and mathematical equations come to mind.
You know DAMN WELL that isn't what we're talking about.
Might as well say a batch file is AI.
We call a new thing AI every 5 years. This cycle it's LLM-powered chatbots.
I cant think of a single thing they can build in the hands of a crazed idiot that wouldnt be better built in the hands of a trained professional.
Ai should, at most, be used to automate tedious, low risk work that anyone in the field could do, but would rather avoid. Examples like protein folding or brute forcing math proofs, really just things that can easily be programmed but are more grunt busywork than anything.
It should NOT be used for developing new features in code, discovering or finalizing math proofs, and most certainly, human expression via art.
Ai's exclusive use should be to free humans to pursue passions, either by reducing work hours or tedium, ideally both.
The thing is the trained professional costs 300k a year (100k in low-income areas like Europe) to employ and a z.ai coding plan sub lowest tier is like 20 bucks a month and makes a ton of mistakes but works at least 10x faster so you get much faster iteration.
Well, a slot machine can actually be a pretty nice arcane cabinet, if you remove all the gambling software, add a little more buttons to it. It doesn't actually make slot machines any more redeemable.
But even beyound that, it increasingly looks like all the meager benefits that llm provides is outweighed by enormous downsides of using llm, both on personal, and on societal level. This is not saying anything about other theory-free inference products, but that's not what we call AI anymore, so that point is moot.
read same analogy to 'tokens' getting spent like coins in a slot machine with similar results 🎰
They must have all of the prize.
https://www.hkrieger.com/Bendytoots
Looks like Pixel Lulu from FFX