Machine learning has been around since the 1950s, but recent developments have taken it from a niche computer science research topic to something that pretty much everyone has interacted with- whether they wanted to or not. There are a ton of debates about machine learning happening right now, especially around the ethics of its training data, the potential for its abuse, and its power and limitations. Is machine learning stealing from artists, coders, and writers? Is it coming for our jobs? Who benefits from it?
Read the full article on Happy Coding here:
Replies to this post appear as comments under the full article on Happy Coding!
That final generated blog post… wow and ick!
Great article Kevin,
Even we humans collect data since birth, we too use them for “business” (manage to live)… and we rarely cite sources… but we do it better than ChaptGPT (but maybe it’s just a matter of evolution).
So humans who write algorithms similar to themselves are walking in the right direction!..of course the difference is that for now the business is only for humans who set up or use the algorithm (algorithm that has no “improvement” consciousness) .
I also noticed that individually humans are “often wise” (for example, they don’t destroy their homes and try to share resources fairly among the people they love), but the “multitude” (without democratic rules) tends to be a “big inert” who does not know how to oppose wrong decisions (destruction of the environment, indifference to poverty).
Maybe technology could offer an edge.
Every single man cannot stop the “big inert” but a DataBase and a software could collect the “multitude of data” and process them as a “multitude of non-self-destructive consciousnesses” offering more useful services and information to the community.
However, it is wonderfully fascinating that a technology makes us talk about such profound topics and not just about how much money it can make.
By the way😊… sorry, but this text is almost completely translated automatically,
One of the things that makes ChatGPT interesting to me is that the company that created it (OpenAI) claims that their mission is “to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity.” That sounds promising, but it’s hard to reconcile that with their decisions around not crediting original creators and monetization: even though they call themselves OpenAI, their products are closed-source and for-profit. Does it benefit all of humanity that Microsoft purchased exclusive rights to GPT-3?
I leave room for maybe the answer to that being yes. But it’s hard for me to feel optimistic about the humanitarian benefits of companies started by people like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel.
On the other hand, it is good that we’re asking these questions and talking about these ideas!
Side note: here’s another blog post about ChatGPT that I found interesting, and maybe a little more optimistic than my take:
Thank you for explaining the ChatGPT “business model” to me.
I agree with your doubts.
My considerations were naturally a hope for the awareness of young people, for their consciences and their intentions.
Tomorrow’s companies will have to live in a favorable social ecosystem and if AI is seen by everyone as a “common good”, they will have to adapt to the laws and common sentiment.