Musk may be right, but I'm totally desensitized to "existential threats" because certain chicken littles are constantly banging that drum.

Johnny04 said:

---

What's the cost of the $600 cover? Cloud computing resources?

---

I am very excited to announce I have been successful in installing and operating a full ChatGPT knowledge set and interface fully trained on my local computer and it needs no Internet once installed.

There are no editors and there is no https://t.co/G3FjlqCj05… pic.twitter.com/MOKYLzkTcc

— Brian Roemmele (@BrianRoemmele) March 20, 2023

I need one in my shop.

Yup, I have code conversations with chatgpt where I lead it to what I need based on the data structures I use and the parameters needing passing. Definitely handy. This tool is also remarkably handy to get front ends setup quickly based on whatever framework flavor of the week is. I can't keep up with all the changes in architecture.

At the current present, people are still needed with skill to know what to ask and how to utilize the output. However, all this will eventually make its way into automation pipelines to validate the syntax and unit testing overtime.

CondensedFogAggie said:

---

It's a stunning piece of new technology no doubt. I was blown away, and use it in my job and everyday life. Very easy to summarize or respond to information, emails, etc.

That being said, when it's wrong, it can be really wrong, and will never know it's wrong unless a human corrects it.

Will it eliminate a ton of jobs? Maybe a few, but overall I don't really think so, as in the end a human has to validate, and oftentimes a single mistake can be extremely costly to a business.

---

I'm curious how you use it in your job, if you don't mind expanding on this.

FWIW, I think AI could be the most disruptive thing we've ever experienced. For most things, the hype outweighs the actual threat. I think AI is the opposite.

PA24 said:

---

I need one in my shop.

---

You need a sexbot in your shop?

Anyone considering law school should think really hard about it. This thing does away with the need for big law associate positions out of law school.

It does away with a lot of entry-mid level jobs. So I wonder in the future how one gets to be an upper level bigshot without first going through the entry-mid level part of their career?

Probably doesn't matter. By then ChatGPT20 will handle upper level positions too.

The Green Dragon said:

---

Anyone considering law school should think really hard about it. This thing does away with the need for big law associate positions out of law school.

---

I don't see this. What do you think lawyers do? That a client comes to them and just says, hey write a general brief on res judicata. No. You have to be able to interact with people, obtain and digest facts and evidence, apply the law and then write a persuasive brief. How is ChatGPT going to take a deposition or cross examine a witness? Or formulate trial strategy?

I have a case right now with a guy with traumatic brain injury from a wreck. There is one picture that shows where his head likely hit the windshield. Is ChatGPT going to be able to pick that out? Defense hired an accident reconstructionist to try to disprove he hit the windshield. Is ChatGPT going to cross examine an accident reconstructionist and decide whether or not to hire an expert to counter that? How about cross examining a neurosurgeon?

And if it can do this, then what about physicians, accountants or any other white collar professional? Why hire a human neurosurgeon when you can have a robot perform the surgery?

What it will do is the poor saps at the big law firms are going to be expected to crank out 3 briefs a day instead of 1.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Summoning a demon is right.

This **** is gonna get out of control before we even know what's happening.

---

Skynet

Nanomachines son said:

---

Publishers have already stopped accepting unsolicited manuscripts and will likely only work through agents soon because the vast majority of what they are receiving now was written by AI.

They will have to add "verified to be human" to books very soon for anything new.

---

Traditional publishing stopped accepting unrepresented works years ago. You aren't going to get a traditional book published without an agent anymore unless you self pub.

I doubt you'll see AI work from a publisher anytime soon because the work cannot be copyrighted. That's why Clarkesworld Magazine closed submissions. They were receiving way too many AI written works. Digital short story publishers are probably going to feel the affect the most as they take unsolicited work more than anyone.

GeorgiAg said:

---

I have a case right now with a guy with traumatic brain injury from a wreck. There is one picture that shows where his head likely hit the windshield. Is ChatGPT going to be able to pick that out?

---

Yes, ChatGPT4 is able to read and understand images

Someone explain this all to me like I'm 5.

NoahAg said:

---

Someone explain this all to me like I'm 5.

---

The internet is a series of tubes.

Nanomachines son said:

---

Dawnguard said:

---

Even more incredible (and demon summoning) is that the ability to train it on your own library (read: biased to your worldview) is also just over the corner (it's already fairly common for images, but close for the language stuff).

We will have all out internet bot battles on forums with very little human input.

Wild time to be alive.

---

How do I know you aren't a bot already? How do I prove that I am real myself? Makes you think.

Actually I know the answer, just tell the other poster to say a racist term and that will prove it. "I'm sorry I can't do that Dave."

---

Would be funny if the ultimate litmus codeword for humans in the future was the n-word or "f***ot" or "men-can't-get-pregnant" or something like that.

Do you think that entry level attorneys are meeting with clients? No. They do research. That was my point.

Nanomachines son said:

---

NoahAg said:

---

Someone explain this all to me like I'm 5.

---

The internet is a series of tubes.

---

Even better:

If (and its debatable) AI becomes sentient AND decides to attack humans, the most obvious vector is to take down our infrastructure - and the most deadly (and easy) will be the power infrastructure.

They (it) won't be able to totally take it completely down - as it depends on power too. But yes, it could greatly reduce the number of humans living pretty quickly - as we are maybe 5-7 days of no power away from self annihilation.

However, when humanity is reduced to a much smaller and more nimble force - it would pretty easily be able to take out AI by finishing off the grid and network (which again, are easy vulnerable targets).

For those few humans that survive - they'd have everything they needed to rebuild the world and hopefully make less mistakes.

Something something about bipedal d cell batteries?

I don't think the danger is that AI will attack us. I think it's that it will render us obsolete.

Here's some words from Elon Musk about how it may change the economy (although he may have also been talking about AI in combination with the TeslaBots he's working on)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qar4jWrsrhg around 7:45

Quote:

---

What is an economy? Sometimes people think an economy is money. Money is a database for exchange of goods and services and for time shifting the exchange of goods and services. Money is a database. Money doesn't have power in and of itself.

If you're shipwrecked on an island, and you've got a trillion dollars in a Swiss bank account, it's worthless. You'd rather have a can of soup.

The actual economy is goods and services. So then what limits the output of goods and services? The limiter is labor. Even capital is distilled labor. So the limiting factor for the economy is labor, and so if you address the limiting factor for the economy then it's not clear that an economy in a traditional sense has any meaning anymore because you have no constraint on goods and services. The only things that will be missing are things that have artificial scarcity, where we decide to make it scarce, like a particular piece of art or particular home in a particular location...

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

NoahAg said:

---

Someone explain this all to me like I'm 5.

---

---

To some degree, without advanced AI, we are already seeing technology and the disruption in the need for productivity wreaking havoc on the human experience.

You can trace the majority of society degradation right now to the divorce between work and increasing standards of living.any humans have completely lost their purpose and it's leading to a crisis or psycholo


The truth is there are already hundreds of millions of humans not necessary to support high standards of living.

Give me one reason leftist-oriented, but hyper advanced future AI would want or need to keep humans around? Wouldn't eliminating all of mankind to save Mother Earth be the ultimate act of virtue?

Wouldn't even have to be bombs or some "Terminator" style war. Theoretically, it seems hyper advanced AI could just engineer and release a pathogen specifically to wipe out all humans with stunning ease.

FrioAg 00 said:

---

The truth is there are already hundreds of millions of humans not necessary to support high standards of living.

---

You could get rid of 90% of the population and that would put us back to where we were in the 1800s

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Give me one reason leftist-oriented, but hyper advanced future AI would want or need to keep humans around? Wouldn't eliminating all of mankind to save Mother Earth be the ultimate act of virtue?

Wouldn't even have to be bombs or some "Terminator" style war. Theoretically, it seems hyper advanced AI could just engineer and release a pathogen specifically to wipe out all humans with stunning ease.

---

Once AI doesn't need people anymore it shouldn't need to care about the environment

TexAgs91 said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Give me one reason leftist-oriented, but hyper advanced future AI would want or need to keep humans around? Wouldn't eliminating all of mankind to save Mother Earth be the ultimate act of virtue?

Wouldn't even have to be bombs or some "Terminator" style war. Theoretically, it seems hyper advanced AI could just engineer and release a pathogen specifically to wipe out all humans with stunning ease.

---

Once AI doesn't need people anymore it shouldn't need to care about the environment

---

I don't know...If it is programmed or conditioned in any way to see earth and animal life as good and worth protecting/saving, I could see that being bad for humans. Or what if it can adapt or evolve to eventually adopt moral causes like "protecting the planet"?

Feels ridiculous talking about this type of stuff with a straight face, but the exponential rate at which this type of stuff is going to advance is something I don't think any of us can truly comprehend. Even if it doesn't end in doom. It's going to knock peoples' socks off.

It's going to be hilarious when "becoming sentient" leads AI to immediately conclude there is a creator and it's probably the Old Testament God

FrioAg 00 said:

---

It's going to be hilarious when "becoming sentient" leads AI to immediately conclude there is a creator and it's probably the Old Testament God

---

All powerful Jewish robots? Just what a few of the "goyem" posters on here need.

We are already seeing fake plugin exploits for ChatGPT. The bad guys are always one step ahead of defenders.

Any details on that?

FrioAg 00 said:

---

If (and its debatable) AI becomes sentient AND decides to attack humans, the most obvious vector is to take down our infrastructure - and the most deadly (and easy) will be the power infrastructure.

They (it) won't be able to totally take it completely down - as it depends on power too. But yes, it could greatly reduce the number of humans living pretty quickly - as we are maybe 5-7 days of no power away from self annihilation.

However, when humanity is reduced to a much smaller and more nimble force - it would pretty easily be able to take out AI by finishing off the grid and network (which again, are easy vulnerable targets).

For those few humans that survive - they'd have everything they needed to rebuild the world and hopefully make less mistakes.

---

fewer

Republicans need to be using ChatGPT and AI to defeat leftists ; yesterday

I think people are making a bigger deal out of AI than is warranted. ChatGPT is just a really fast form of Google. You ask it a question and it just does the equivalent of a fast Google search and regurgitates an answer. It's basically just a computerized version of an idiot savant.

It's recreative, not creative.