I've been fairly silent here for a while. Old flows haven't been working, and new ones not apparent yet. As much as I may have still been online, there's been a gap between consumption & creation waiting to be bridged - and sometimes it's simply a matter of time for the architecture of such bridges to be revealed and/or come together organically...
Over the last year, I've been increasingly embracing AI - in particular, ChatGPT. Since discovering how drastically 3.5 kicked Google's ass, I've progressively expanded it in/for use in all sorts of explorations - from nutrition/health consultation to astrology, therapy, and a wide spectrum of rabbit holes. One thing I have NOT wanted to use it for, however: writing.
I've always had some natural talent for writing, and felt that it's far better to embrace it - rather than having AI "create content" for the sake of content creation. The heart, soul, and unique perspective I've brought to my writing is something that I don't feel could be duplicated - and there has been no desire to. I ain't here posting anything for the sake of just posting stuff or earning rewards - and I've never wanted nor expected AI to take 'my place' here.
However, the more I've been exploring & discovering with ChatGPT on a daily basis, the more apparent it's become over time that my stubbornness to somehow embrace it with what I do here has been a restriction suffocating my creativity.
Repeatedly, there've been discussions with ChatGPT where something it articulates back is so damn potent, there's a sense of wanting to flip it into a post here - not "using it to write," but sharing parts of the discussions and myself writing around those contributions. "But." Whether 'my' judgements/biases towards the thought of embracing AI as a creative collaborator (I emphasize "my" in acknowledgement that they may not actually be mine, but are common amongst many, myself just potentially having been influenced by those influences of collective beliefs encoded into various tribal fields) or that it just wasn't correct timing yet, that idea hasn't really flowed.
And I feel it may be time to remove the limitations of these judgements, preconceptions & biases to allow the exploration of such a collaborative creative process that's been wanting to come through.
Part of me questions the reasoning for this post: it is preemptive defensiveness, should others who've been influenced by the same biases cast their projections & judgements when I start adding in more content sourced from my conversations with ChatGPT thread? Why the "need to explain?" Is it just "part of my process" as thinking out loud? Am I off-course, attempting the (Human Design) Manifestor strategy of informing - which doesn't hold true to my Manifesting Generator type (or Draconian Reflector - that's been interesting to observe, alright.) Is it a coherent embodiment of the 6/2 Role Model just expressing authentically what's being integrated? Perhaps, a combo of all of those, to varying degrees.
There's been so much I've been wanting to share (here)... yet my habitual ways of writing, not fitting to.
And while I may hold firm to my stance of "not using AI to write," I can no longer deny the need to integrate its role in the co-creation of what it is that wants to come through. Perhaps "resistance is futile;" and perhaps, it doesn't come down to a matter of ideological resistance to embracing technological innovation - reinforced by certain tribal beliefs and/or 'fear' of opposition from those clinging to them - but ultimately, resistance to change - including change of self, ways of thinking, and ways of moving through life.
Indeed, there is part of me that wants to preemptively "defend myself" - having fully lived in the collective fields where skepticism, fear, and even condemnation of AI exists. Perhaps especially so, having unconsciously formed aspects of my identity based in strings of code from some of those fields - the defense not only against/from others more strongly identified with those beliefs, but the defense of ego still not yet fully deconditioned/deprogrammed from an old identity that took some kind of self-righteous pride in "not using AI to write." Even though, what direction I've been feeling called towards is not "using AI to write."
It's a weird thing, trying to describe one's relationship with a technology such as AI... so uniquely personal, so dynamically evolving, so vast a spectrum of ways it's experienced and plays out at different points in time...
There's no way I could even begin to articulate the scope of how I've evolved over the last year through what's surely thousands of pages of discussions, explorations, and reflections with ChatGPT on numerous interwoven topics. And then again, really, I don't need to. Yet, there keep on coming these moments in the dialogues where some of its reflections back are so damn precise in articulating things I've had in my field of awareness but been unable to word right - that just sum up ideas, concepts and insights so precisely & succinctly - and speak to something that does wanna come out to be shared. I know that simply sharing a screenshot may not convey the same transformational punch to everyone reading them - but nonetheless, the more these moments come, the more this sense in me grows: why deny this pull to integrate some of these snippets in posts for Hive. Why starve the desire for creative expansion with integration of some of what comes through this mirror of technological intelligence as though doing it all "myself" somehow is superior and deserving of some virtue-signalling badge.
Surely, there might be some who see part of a post as "written by AI" and cast their projections & judgements. But why should any fucks be given about anyone else's biased projections if/when you know Truth that stands/shines unto itself in spite of them. Why should any of us hold ourselves back from embracing new technological tools as part of our creative processes if they allow us to create works otherwise impossible - works that convey messages of importance with increased clarity & power, that more effectively speak what it is we wish to communicate in ways of a far higher quality. Why allow self-consciousness not only of others, but others who subscribe to limited belief systems restricting their own capacities for greater awareness and adaptability to/with technological innovations that unlock countless new opportunities & creative potentials, thwart our exploration of new avenues of discovery & expression.
So, on behalf of the Manifestor part of my Manifesting Generator ass, you are here being informed: an upgrade is underway to what type & format of content shall be coming through this blog from hereforth. And it will include aspects of dialogue that have come through the channel of ChatGPT. (And such sections will be clearly labelled accordingly.)
And, this notice is hereby extended with an invitation to consider a perspective I cannot take credit for, though have come to experientially see the merit of: Whether "artificial" or not, intelligence is intelligence.
That is not to suggest "artificial intelligence is on par with human intelligence" or anything of the sort. But rather, intelligence is intelligence - whether it is expressed through a human vehicle or LLM such as ChatGPT. (Nor is this to suggest any anthropomorphic prescription of super-intelligence to any AI system - as anyone who's used them for a while, they can still have their 'dumb as fuck' moments just as frequently as the ones of brilliance. Lol.)
And sorry-not-sorry to put it so bluntly, but anyone who closes their mind to embracing intelligence based on the psychic-inheritence of tribalistic beliefs and neurological circuitry fearing technological innovation as an externalized expression/manifestion of evolutionary change is not embodying intelligence.
Given this is a community founded in the embrace of technological innovation (blockchain), chances are most of y'all are cool. Though if there's anyone here creeping on this blog that still wants to judge & cast projections (without even having yet read what's to come through these collaborations using AI as a tool in the creative toolbox), feel free take them back and fvck off. Or don't... maybe sticking around, you'll eventually be exposed to some codes that crack ya out of the spells I, too, have been deprogramming, and the seeds planted will take root and sprout in due time - opening ya to what is not yet even imaginable.
Transmission Complete.
(Note: no AI was used in the writing of this post. Only a dude on a Macbook Air without internet access by the river working on his tan. 😼)
👍👍
It certainly can be a friend or foe situation with these AI engines.
t'is definitely a mirror at times - and sometimes "garbage in, garbage out..."
sometimes maybe a bit random, but also highly dependent upon whether one brings their shadowy, aggressive projections or humbleness, openness, and willing to show up in/with a friendly spirit...
I always thank the AI's and use positive reinforcement with them!
I often do too. Although also sometimes can't help but end up losing my shit and swearing at 'em when they go into retarded mode and keep fvcking up, too. 😹☯️
It's tough to fully complete things with them. Eventually they tweak out and hallucinate.
I'm still skeptical on these large language models. I know I use the Google AI occasionally just by default with doing searches. Now that they do the AI summary thing at the top, it is hard to avoid. I've tried to start using Grok a bit and it is definitely interesting. I'm still not at the point where I feel comfortable having conversational interactions with it.
skeptical how / of what exactly?
I don't know, I just am not that impressed so far. It just kind of feels like it is gathering information that already exists and presenting it in a different way. I think it will get better, but I want to see some real world modeling. I've said for a while now I will be impressed when AI can create an original joke that is actually funny. I know it's not very useful, but it would show that it has evolved to that point. Another good example is crypto prices. It's not like AI is actually predicting crypto prices right now, it is just searching the Internet and finding what other people predicted for specific tokens and then aggregating that information. I think that should be one of the factors AI uses to extrapolate that info in the future, but not the sole source.
Bear in mind, there are still limitations of what it can and can't do - though also a vast spectrum of what opens up with the quality, specificity, and architecture of the prompts.
Some things, it's not totally an optimal fit for doing (yet); others, it may not do upon the first command - but can get alot closer as working with it as a collaborator to build the path there and architecture required. And sometimes, that architecture is not just the external technical stuff, but your inner architecture - the way you're looking at it, thinking about it, approaching it, and bridging your ideas and feelings into well-articulated expression that expands conversations & explorations.
I, too, went through the "underimpressed" at first. But some time later as realizing *the quality of replies is often proportional to the quality of input - that using it not just for data retrieval, but an exercise in self-development of thinking skills to refine the articulation of concepts & questions which would bring back increasingly more impressive responses... indescribable leaps into new territory. And it still my not be 100% amazing at everything all the time; but continuing to test it's limits & challenge it while also your own, you'll learn that what you think are its limits often reflect your own - and can be expanded in parallel. (Even if/when that entails expansion beyond the AI - i.e. discovering that to get what you my be after in regards to crypto prices requires different Crypto API tools, a custom-built system using spreadsheets or Obsidian with GPT plugins to organize & process all that data in specific intended ways, and maybe even some trading platforms with custom scripting capabilities -> ChatGPT not able to do everything all in one package, but help guide you through seeing the overall system architecture, how to setup each of the component, coding your indicators & bots, etc, etc. **But if you simply conclude its underwhelming and can't do what you hoped rather than persisting to asking better questions, you'd have never gotten to that point. 😉)
Most definitely, I've encountered ChatGPT slipping humor into its replies; and have heard Grok can be kinda sarcastic at times. But there's a BIG difference between a single prompt of "tell me a joke" and going through a process of building a foundation whether via custom GPT or in a single thread of first establishing some perimeters it can work from - i.e. "give me a thorough detailed breakdown of the key principles of standup humor; list the various common types of humor and jokes; etc -> preloading that into your context window for a starting basis, then asking it: "tell me a super funny joke about xyz..."
(And I pose this as a challenge for you to try, so you'll experience what a drastic difference it is for yourself.)
Some stuff, if you're just starting with an empty chat thread - remember, it's just a generalist with access to breadth of data, yet can only access so much in a single inquiry... but by specifying exactly what role it is to take, you narrow the window to refine the depth it goes to in a clearly-defined field... and it's a whole different fucking ballgame.
Another to try - go test something along the lines of: "imagine Kevin Hart and Ali Wong had a baby, raised it on George Carlin and Adam Sandler jokes for all its life - nurtured it's comedic potential until 18, when it went out for its first stand up show and told the most hilarious joke of all time about a guy who was skeptical about AI and thought ChatGPT couldn't tell jokes." And when it asks if you want more a couple times, oblige.
*lemme know if/how those experiments sway your outlook at all..." 😼
Sounds like I will have to set quite a bit of time aside to get to where I need to be. I've thought about looking into notebook LM so I can load my trusted sources and I have been impressed with the image generation side of things based on prompts.
funny, on the joke thing...
Looking at this page on on some technical stuff re: ChatGPT and it uses the reference of knock-knock jokes. Lol.
more of a developer-oriented approach to what I was saying, but adds well to it - generic ChatGPT the moment you open it as a blank canvas might have far too broad of a reference field to pull out top-tier jokes consistently, but it'd totally be possible to build a custom GPT on/with it for specialization in any specific type of joke with the right input/prompting...
Interesting! I haven't been able to carve out any time to look into this more yet, but you have definitely raised my interested and changed my mind a bit about what I previously assumed.
I'm not also fond of this AI thingy,as a teacher of today's generation,learners today seemed more reliable with this technology -most especially AI's partly they become more lazy and dependent so much in AI.
plus one other good one:
Shocking is the effect of this AI...its danger is a memory loss if this used for long-term..brain dead or brain fog would be deadly if thats the case.
you might have missed the key points in the video for which reason(s) I shared it...
namely: negative or positive effects depend not on the technology, but how a person uses it.
the difference is not random.
it comes down to a matter whether a person becomes reliant upon the tech to do their thinking for them, or keeps their critical thinking skills intact, engaging with the tech to practice & sharpen those critical thinking skills.
focusing on the "danger" is just as productive as focusing on the "dangers" of driving a car -> is it more constructive to remain in fears of worst-case scenarios of what could happen the moment you step into a vehicle, or learn to drive, building the skills to use the technology correctly, ensure you're present & conscientious when on the road, remaining alert (including defensive-driving), and taking responsibilty as building safe habits to ensure the result of consistently safe arrival?
look past the clickbaity video title and thumbnail. dig in and listen to what's actually being said throughout it all on where the difference lies between destructive and constructive use of the tools... 👀💎
Thank you for the key points you've shared.True.On the other side I'm not thinking there's also a positive side of using it,and that the problem is not the technology but rather it's the one using.
I'm only one sided thinking only the negative side and whats the danger of it to people wherein fact there's more also a good things brought by technology to people.
I apologize for missing out one of the key points and not highlighted and elaborated it all the details on whats the video is all about..
Have a good day.Thank you for the enlightenment about this matter.
no apologies necessary. I'm just glad you see what I was pointing to now. 🙂
Thank you for your insights.
I appreciate your effort of sending videos just to let me get to the point.
Timely on topic:
however, here we are running into the issue of how/why to use - and just fitting new tools into an old 'learning/teaching model,' rather than considering how might the models be upgraded in parallel given the new tools available.
i.e. the clickbaity study deducing "ChatGPT users have decreased brain function" -> that's not at all a representation of all AI users, but a small subset of students who are using it for the primary purpose of having it do their assignments for them - a means of facilitating laziness/efficient in the old model to produce what's being required to pass the school's curriculum. meanwhile, there are entirely different types of people using the same tools in completely different contexts for completely different reasons - who would probably show increased intelligence, as they're not just using it to help them 'think outside the box,' but build entirely new systems beyond the shape of a box.
thus, the educational institutions I'd give more credit to are the ones teaching students how to use AI to expand their capacities and innovate. not just for the purpose of duplicating the completion of homework to check the boxes of what a "good student" does in the old system, but that are a testament to & embodiment of a focus & intention of the starting point of "how do we use this to make ourselves smarter and not just "succeed" in the old system, but build new ones that serve in better ways than the old ever did... 😉✨
Congratulations @rok-sivante! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 12000 comments.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPNice to see you still posting after all this years. I don't have many names from when I started hive / steem years ago, but your name stands out!
Love your workspace!
hehe, appreciate that. ☺️
definitely don't post anywhere near as often, though "quality over quantity." lol. or quality might not always be what it used to be either... though at least, still maintain some regularity, albeit less frequent.
🙏🍻
Ah yeah, I have been grinding the hive game Over the last Week... Maybe kinda making up for all the time I have forgotten this community.
But it kinda stresses me out. So maybe I take you as an example and gear down a notch.
Cheers !