I was reading an article in the Finnish news today talking about Statistics Finland and how they are trying to combat AI inaccuracy. What they have noticed is that in the last year, the usage of their site has dropped 17% due to people being satisfied with the AI answers they get from Google. But as you can imagine with statisticians, they were less than impressed with the accuracy of the results they tested, which is because the AI isn't pulling the statistics directly, but rather using other sources that might have taken the statistics originally from Statistics Finland or other sites, and then misinterpreted them or have the wrong numbers to begin with.
The solution they are working on for this is using the Model Context Protocol to create an interpreter for the statistics database, making it far easier for an AI to interpret the information based on the prompt. Well, in theory at this point, as it hasn't been created yet. However, this all does serve as a warning that the AI summaries that are keeping people happy and feeling they have the right information, can be pretty inaccurate. But, a searcher would only know that, if they were an expert who already had the right answer. A bit of a conundrum.
Insert smooth segue.
Using AI in posts.
Smoooooth.
I don't know how long it has been there, but I noticed a "Use of AI" tab which is labelled new in the advanced settings after a refresh. Maybe it has been there for a while, and I didn't see the little green flag, but anyway, it is there now, I have seen it now, and I am writing about it now.
Essentially, it is a checkbox where it is possible to add where a posting account has used AI tools. As you can imagine, I don't use any of them except for researching, but that is pretty rare. Sometimes though, I will take a dictionary definition from the Search results or something, and that is AI generated, pulling from various dictionaries. It saves me going to the dictionary site, or typing it all out and adding the phonetics for it, like I used to do.
I am adding "research" to this post so I see what it looks like in the UI later.
What I wonder is whether people will actually use this feature to tag their posts, when it also says, "Rewards are usually meant for original, personal work". Using AI is not original, nor personal. Yet there seems to be people who believe that because they added a prompt themselves to get a result, the result is theirs. I have written many different perspectives of this nonsense, but suffice to say, using AI doesn't make it yours.
But I don't want to get into that now.
Lately, I have been thinking about how much I dislike AI images as cover photos for articles. The images themselves are fine, the quality is good and all, but I just see it as cheap and tacky. I would much rather see a grainy, crappy image that someone has taken during their day, that doesn't quite match the topic written about, than some polished AI image. I dislike it so much that I have considered making my communities "AI cover image free", but haven't done so yet. What I will start looking at is whether people are tagging their images as AI generated, because it is pretty bloody obvious that they are.
My images are all mine. Because obviously, they aren't as good as AI ones.
I hate AI people images the most.
Again, not because they aren't good quality images, nor because they don't look real, because many do. But I think we are warping our senses by fooling ourselves into believing what we see. We aren't made to judge like this, so our preferences are going to change based on non-existent subjects. Many people don't see a problem with this, I do. There is a mental illness aspect to it, akin to the people who are willing to marry their robot vibrator with an AI assistant voice, because they are meant to be together.
Get real.
I mean that quite literally. I think many of us are spending so much time in false realities that we can no longer differentiate between what is real and what is not. We are therefore setting our expectations based on impossibilities, meaning that our real-world experience can never meet our virtual reality-based desires. A lot of people would talk about unrealistic body expectations based on the images in magazines, but at least back in the not too distant past, those people were living, breathing people, with good genes, diet and exercise regimen. Later, some photoshop too, but they were still recognisable as the person in the photo.
Until recently.
Now, there are so few real images of people being published that haven't run the gauntlet of face filters to the point that the flesh and blood person and the image posted is so far apart, they are unrecognisable. These aren't a touch up of a blemish, these are changing face shape and eye size, and lip fullness. It is pretty disgusting, if you think enough about it. And then you have people who are now so attached to the false images they have surrounded themselves with, that they have surgery to look like a filter. And now, the surgically enhanced faces all look the same.
But I digress.
Or perhaps I progress in the discussion, because while people keep using AI to enhance their articles and make their "work" far better than they can actually do, what they are also doing is resetting their expectations of what they are capable of, but they aren't actually capable at all. It isn't a skill enhancement, it is a filter over the face of skill, and soon, everyone is going to skill the same.
AI isn't going away and I am no luddite. But, like pretty much any of the technology humans have created, rather than using it for creating a better, more humane world, we use it to feed our ego in one way or another instead.
The ego doesn't exist either.
Yet it drives most of what we do.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Be part of the Hive discussion.
- Comment on the topics of the article, and add your perspectives and experiences.
- Read and discuss with others who comment and build your personal network
- Engage well with me and others and put in effort
And you may be rewarded.
Many years ago I developed several projects in Second Life, the first real 3D metaverse launched in 2007 if I am not mistaken. One of the first impression you got when interacting in the platform is that all avatars representing users were "perfect", you could decide about your face, hair, body shape, clothing, walking etc. And of course, you could change any of those any time you wanted. There were many, many good and interesting uses of that platform, from getting immersed into the reproduction of a disease inside a human body and taking a lecture inside to having a 3D representation of your future house from the architectural company designing it and waling inside to experience that space. But of course, everything was unreal and at some point, after spending several hours a day in there, your reality was changing little by little to the point it can end up fooling you.
AI in a way, is similar to that, it "reproduces" a reality, be it with data, images or explanations which are created from previous information. The problem is when we get fooled thinking that is the "real truth" and do not take it as just one of the options.
The problem today is AI is everywhere, not just inside a "closed platform" as Second Life, and sometimes you don't even realize you may be interacting with AI. I am sure, little by little scientist and experts will learn how to use data sources with caution, making a difference from those supported by AI and those directly from real sources, the problem is that 95% of the users will not act like that, and they will believe any information they get browsing on any site.
The next generations will have a wild world to live in as "fake" unreal world grows bigger and bigger compared to "real" one
I never played any of these, or WoW or anything. But, I have a friend who got divorced because of WoW, as he was spending all his waking hours on it, rather than with his wife, who was also a friend of mine, gorgeous, fit and intelligent. He was fooled into thinking what he was doing mattered, while what mattered walked away.
This is why I question marked "research" because even though I am generally aware, when the result is generated from a database somewhere, it is likely using AI anyway. It is opaque to me though, and I worked in an AI-driven information management company :)
Only at the level of the pusher, not the consumer. I reckon this is where blockchain should be used to ensure original information is verified.
Every dystopian movie and book come to life....
"Seems to have created a new form of manipulation where the one being manipulated is actually manipulating themselves."
Something I said over two years ago.
I've been using AI to replace search for a long time. There's skill involved. Good to question the answers. Fun messing with it. Good for simple research and time saving.
I used to use this thing — a lot. AI likes to throw those in where they should be, when asking it to fix grammar. Good writers get shit on nowadays for using it. "This is AI!"
"So here I am at a crossroads, looking at those people over there. Observing each one being seduced by a new set of tools, caving under peer pressure, then exchanging the freedom to be in control for a quick and easy fix. Then changing entirely, forgetting who they were, while others notice a certain element or a spark they once had is now missing. People sense it, feeling deprived of the creative energies once surrounding them; can't even trust what they see anymore."
Something else I wrote around the same time, years ago. That was about the arts. Wrote a post a year ago talking about how it'll be interfering with communication. That's happening a lot more now. Even the people not using it are growing paranoid. All while some using it excessively are, FUBAR.
Yes. But most people don't pay attention, nor are they very predictive past what they want to feel in the next moment, so they don't see it. You (and I) are a little different in that way.
Yes they do. UK politicians have started using US terms in their speeches, because their speech writers use AI. These people were good writers before (for the most part) and now, they are homogenizing into a single voice. But again, people don't pay attention.
The path is very predictable, but most don't see it because predictably, they each think they are smarter than getting caught. Much like all those smart people on social media who believe they aren't influenced by it. And those smart people who know they should limit their screen time, but don't. And those smart people who think they are creative, but create nothing. People are predictable.
"Standardized groupthink" was a term I used lightly while writing and commenting on this topic.
Early on I was saying this is what could happen. Now I'll say that's what is happening.
Now here's the kicker. The AI search has come a long way. Not perfect; better. I threw that term into search and asked who said it. I was given the name James Surowiecki. So I asked when and was told in 2004 when he published Wisdom of Crowds. So I asked why and was given some key details and a summary that I summarized simply as "garbage in garbage out" while talking about these things way back when.
First time I've heard of that guy and his book. So. "Great minds think alike" or "Standardized groupthink?"
Insert laughter here
And you bring up creativity. For me that's a triggering reminder of how much I miss it. How can I deny AI is causing turbulence in this world when I'm one who felt the nails being driven into the coffin.
Of maybe I should bring back that chaotic mess? My fancy and not-so subtle method of giving this generated world of rigid wannabe perfectionism the middle finger once more?
Nah...
Man, the whole AI business is very creepy but at the same time, is it worth even the time to discuss about it? I mean, since we were born this world laughs at us with its absurdity and I feel this is just another of its trollish manifestations. Like what you say that people are trying to combat inaccuracy, it makes me think: "really?" And you're getting paid for that? Let's face it, the mass likes to make stupid decisions and follow the worst sources of information because they are the most fun and easy to follow. At least the scientific resources could be used to boost organic realities but it's all just a big shitshow. We're probably already paying people to analyze the psychology of AI so imagine how crazy this has become. My thought is that to go against this tide it would be much better to ignore the whole circuss and enjoy whatever beauty there is still left outside the show.
Is there beauty left?
You are probably right in it is better to ignore it all, but I struggle with it today. Maybe I will snap out of it one day, or more likely, just snap. I am not built for this current world. It is too absurd for me.
There's much beauty left, come to South America where there's still a life to be lived. Also your savings will be worth 10× or more heheh
That's one of the most dangerous qualities of AI, distorting reality. It occurs to me that AI can ruin our access to reliable information. And so many people are so uninformed that they post information generated by AI as if they are proven facts, without doing some deep research of their own.
This problem will stop once people begin to realize that AI is not here to take over our tasks from us, but rather to aid, and as such we still have to put in the bulk of the work ourselves.
A lot of people seem all too happy to be deceived, because they can't bear the view of reality they have. People want to feel like they have a good life, but don't want to do the work to have one.
Here few of the telecom service providor is offering a year of free access to AI models like Gemini or perplexity. I am eligible to get the access but yet to access it as I do not want my kids get habitual to such thing. It is good to use our own researches and use brain then completely depend upon the technology...it is going to future no doubt, but to manage them productively require sharp brain.
People were complaining about the electricity to mine Bitcoin. AI processing takes far more, and it is being used to make silly images.
Our priorities are a mess.
Getting terrible day by day....
Exactly, expecially for the sake of the kids.
I really don't buy the idea of using Ai, when the child uses his or her brain to make research the results just sticks and it's their own knowledge not some generated work.
Although the photos generated using AI are beautiful and attractive, I also like taking my own photos even though they look blurry or different. Although nowadays people are becoming more dependent on AI and especially I can see many people's writings and photos who are editing them through AI and publishing them in various media. However, nowadays many people I know, whether for fun or for knowledge, are taking the help of AI instead of Google to get any information and many people ask many questions about their personal lives and it gives AI fabricated information. For example, one of my acquaintances asked AI when will I get married and what will my wife be like? AI gave its own answer there which is really funny. So its use in all cases is not completely safe and provides reliable information.
Lol. How the hell does your friend think the AI could have an answer for that? In the future it will of course, because all of society will be engineered by a general intelligence AI that puts us in a matrix reality for our own safety.
I think the way AI changes our perception of reality is strange. Seems a lot of people are ready to take AI-created information as truth without checking it, which can cause false information to spread quickly.
Just think how strange it is that people are using AI to create their love interests.
Few days ago, one of my colleagues referred to AI to send an e-mail as he didn't like what he wrote.
I see how big companies are now making commercials using AI. I also don't like the way artificial people advertise their products to me during breaks in YouTube videos. I didn't really like the actors either. But here I feel doubly deceived :)
I heavily limit my exposure to most advertising. Even if I happen to use YouTube, I turn away from the screen or flip the phone when adverts are on. It seems silly perhaps, but it keeps me aware that it is happening.
In case of researching, I say straightly no to AI as it's still far from accurate and I figured out it when I was writing my research paper.
In case of AI picture, I don't like it too much but for few post I think it's ok when the post is related to teacher and AI picture can help in better understanding.
I used AI tools to check if my grammar is ok or not but the output of AI tools can't satisfy me fully and I can't fully leave my post to AI tools to correct my grammar. I use tools as suggestion and I prefer to correct it manually if I think it's right.
The problem is that once started, it becomes a slippery slope because it is easier to use answers from AI or the support tools, feeling like one is learning. But, people aren't learning, they are repeating, like parrots.
Indeed, For learning AI is a great tool and save a lot of time but people are busy to misuse it or doing something silly.
The picture side of Ai is really so deceptive because it makes one feel less of their self.
Recently a friend of mine is so found of post Ai generated pictures online and they look so real. At some point I began to compare myself with her, it was so real that I felt she was living the life. Not until some days back when she slide into my DM for assistance....then it dawn on me that Ai was just doing it's thing.
Back in my days we use our brain to do most things including calculating figures.
Thanks