yeah imma keep it real with you, i ain't wasting my time writing an essay or sum when i can take one sentence into an AI instead. more free time for me.
however i do not possess the audacity to then claim that i am a "AI writer" or sum
i feel like this is emblematic for the shit state of the world. like ppl should write essays because they wanna say something. if you can have an ai write your essay for you, then why are u even writing an essay in the first place? i know the answer to that is because your school or work commands it, and thats such alienating bs.
I’m sure the argument here will be about the definition of “novel” no matter what evidence I provide. Every time LLMs do something previously supposed impossible, people quickly move the goalposts. Downvote me all you want, I know Lemmy is strongly anti-AI and nothing I say actually matters.
Lol, I can't even downvote you cuz my instance doesn't support them.
I'm genuinely curious because it sounds like you're suggesting that the models are moving past just being generative transformers into something more intelligent, and I just have not seen evidence of that. Only empty claims of it existing and using very weak examples of 'novel responses' that still is just a generative transformers response.
But sure, if you can't support your point with solid evidence, passive aggressive dismissal of skepticism works just as well. People are constantly fed a narrative that AI is amazing and can do all this novel shit, but I have yet to see anything to back it up.
Only empty claims of it existing and using very weak examples of 'novel responses' that still is just a generative transformers response.
Right, this is exactly what I’m talking about. Saying that it’s “still just a generative transformer’s response” by definition presupposes that every response must be unnovel, even if the solution can be proven to not be in the training set. This is a pointless discussion if that is the line you want to draw.
I’m happy to discuss this further if you are willing to argue in good faith. The first step would be to set firm definitions for our terms so there is no goalpost moving. Otherwise, I have no interest in this conversation.
A lot of people here just lack the critical thinking to properly critisize AI. Yes, AI is guilty of a lot of mediocre slop, it doesn't mean that AI as a whole is bad in every possible regard.
It also doesn't take much of a big brain to realize you can do more with AI than to use it as a writer or as an ideation tool for writing, which is a bad way to use it.
Which goes back to my point that you need better critical thinking to criticize AI, because this ain't it.
And my point is that if you dismiss AI as a whole because of these criticisms, you're failing to see that AI can be used other ways.
But I'm not talking about you, I was responding to someone else.
but then why are you even bothering with work or school? Take some pride in your work, put some effort in to improve your life. You will learn more/perform better.
It might be important, but also inefficient and genuinely terrible to live through for many people. I don't understand how some people can look back fondly of school, mine was fucking awful.
In my 5 years at secondary school in the UK, 2 teachers arrested for rape of a student, one disappeared with no statement given after getting into a fist fight with a student and teachers looking the other way at violence between kids was a daily occurrence. Often went home with bruises and no one cared, told our head of year before and he blamed me for it, apparently climbing a tree means I deserve to be thrown into a wall and pushed into a main road.
My country has one of the best educations in the world. I was pretty decent in essays as well. But in no way did I particularly enjoy them. So idk what your point is.
Being on the IT industry, I can assure you that AI can teach you more stuff than most teachers. But that's not to give credit to AI, it's a result of my country, and many others, not investing on education.
I mean, yeah, if you're doing college or university just to certify the skills you already have, all the power to you. I've also learned a lot of stuff despite my professors' best efforts to make it as dull as possible (which was in 2010s). But framing it as anything but means to game the broken system is not it.
The only time you're wasting is time you could be improving yourself. By having the AI write for you, you're choosing to not improve your writing/research/analytical skills, and hoping the dipshit bot that's writing your essay doesn't just make bullshit up out of whole cloth.
I'm not saying not to use the AI to assist with the process, but IMO that should be more on the gathering sources side than the composition side.
These last week I had to make some questions about a topic to test myself, and to practice answering those questions.
I don't need to improve in "question writing skills" or anything like that. Even better, it's very convenient to not known what questions would I get so it's more like a real exam. So I just took an LLM inputted the topic I wanted to be asked about and told it to make me questions.
I'm very happy with the results, it was fast and help me practice answering the questions about the topic I was studying.
the only thing i'd improve at is to pull words out my ass to get the presentation to 10 minute length although everything could be said in 3 minutes. i use AI to take care of the bullshit, then i fact check and improve/rewrite. that way i didi in 20 minutes what others took hours to do
my time on this planet is as limited as yours or any others. i will make the most of it. just cause you don't value your time, doesn't mean others shouldn't too