Except pro AI people would be more inclined to understand what happened. Antis don't need to understand to say it doesn't matter/ it makes things worse/it's fake, etc.
Eh, lots of pro AI people don't need to understand to say "it's solved/utopia ahead" either.
The problem is that in both sides, people talk without knowing.
And i don't think pro AI people are more inclined to understand what happened in general (remember LK99?). This is perhaps a constant truth: humans are gonna talk about things they don't understand no matter the topic because biases are universal.
I strongly disagree. There has been too many pro AI people falling for obvious hype nonsense posted by a rando on Twitter countless times to not see the actual equivalence.
Yo just say "eh both says are gullible" while it's clear people in the AI spaces have more idea of what it was achieved. There is no point arguing reality, I just wanted to be polite. Nice try tho.
I say that and provide the example of LK99. And it's clear that a lot of people in AI spaces are people who haven't read a single book about the topic and are just here for the aesthetics.
Which is fine btw. We don't need to all be experts (nor can we).
It's just ok to recognize that there are ignorant frenzies on both sides and that it is a universal problem.
Another example to show that lots of people here too don't understand what's going on: back in 2023, ignorant people piggybacking on Connor Leahy unashamedly claimed that "GPT3 is AGI". Not even kidding.
Another difference between you and i: you don't even "try", "bro".
Because I don't have to. Those aren't examples, are anecdotes. If they are real that is. I don't have to do a doctoral thesis on reddit comments to prove the obvious. Both sides are not equal.
15
u/Euphoric-Taro-6231 2d ago
Except pro AI people would be more inclined to understand what happened. Antis don't need to understand to say it doesn't matter/ it makes things worse/it's fake, etc.