i_dont_like_AI a_programmer

@n_dimension@infosec.exchange @wifsten@mas.to Fine work. It's good to research the inadequacy also of results one is agreement with! That's the true scientific spirit. It is in looking for actual facts with a non-self-asure attitude that we can get to genuine insights. Fake papers are not worth quoting even though their results are something one is in agreement of. By the way, there has been an MIT study (ie, a _real_ study) some months ago that pointed in same direction--that overhelpful computers make brains dumb.

@n_dimension@infosec.exchange @wifsten@mas.to Yes! Underneath is I think right link to study that I have heard of--the article is from July 19, 2025 & hopefully is serious research 😉 This sort of theme was been discussed in 2025 on a front-page-listed article at WSJ, where journalist found that he was loosing French because the computer had been 'overhelpful' with French. In the previous 10-15 years there have been several in-depth studies on the negative effects of overhelpful computers. https://www.hpcwire.com/2025/07/19/ai-is-making-us-dumber-mit-researchers-find/

@hakona@im.alstadheim.no @mttaggart@infosec.exchange I take it that you mean 'brutal' here in the sense of 'brutally fantastic'? It is an extremely cool language to hear LLM described for the statistics it is rather than according to what CEOs like to present it as

@wikiemol @JonathanBaxter I am always glad when people are discussing things philosophically (and I still haven't figured out how in Mastodon one can read a whole conversation). But from a superficial reading of this particular post, I find myself wondering: how can we so easily talk about what AI "knows"? Isn't it a huge philosophical challenge to suggest that an algorithm + data can ever "know" anything? Unless we're talking just of replication of the possible behaviour of a knowing person.

A country in which "AI" is being developed at furious speed without yet strict laws governing "AI" at all levels is like a giant Wuhan laboratory, where top technology and under top secrecy things nobody can control is being developed, not to serve humanity, but to serve their stock market price.

@hakona@im.alstadheim.no @mttaggart@infosec.exchange You mean that there are any AI cultists left anywhere? 😂

@hakona@im.alstadheim.no @mttaggart@infosec.exchange true. But insofar as these 'AI cultings' people read statistics, they will see that there is only one item viewed less positively than their petty tacky el-stealing "AI" at least in the US public view, and that's the topic "Iran".

@n_dimension@infosec.exchange @wifsten@mas.to Right, it'll be interesting to see if they do a follow-up. We should really have much much much more serious research on the effects of brains of _all_ sorts of things connected to daily life in our tech socities. One of the most inspiring things in science I know of is the studies of how synchronous brain waves arise between toddler and care-taker when they engage in proto-dialogue; and similar can happen between adults as well. This has what M. Buber called "I-Thou" in it

@n_dimension@infosec.exchange @wifsten@mas.to May I ask whether it is so very fruitful to encircle group the wild diversity of people who feel that society is being dragged in the wrong direction by big tech? I think dialogue is important; & it is important to be able to respect that dislike can have rational grounds & isn't always identical to hate. I dislike what big tech is doing as for taking psychological terms to machines & services they sell, and fighting regulations that can inject ethics into programming.