AI is in need of larger discussions, where people from various disciplines are involved. Meaning, not just tech people, nor only SEOs.
Discussions without massive bias and by people that understand what bias is and can (fairly) effectively keep it in check. (I.e. self-aware to at least higher level than the average person.)
Right now, lots of discussions are emotional outbursts.
Few people actually work with AI from various perspectives. It keeps them in their bubble and I think that limits them from exploring ideas beyond what their scope is.
I don’t have all the answers, but lots of questions. (If you feel you have all the answers, you are actually clueless.)
Discussions online are littered with people having an opinion but few have taken any meaningful plunge into it.
Working now with lots of different topics has kept me somewhat humble. … I think.
Lots of people get extremely protective, and the discussions crash due to their ego. A lot of people seems to suggest (directly or indirectly) that they have some kind “divine” advantage over AI … while using Grammarly. =)
These people can’t define what those “special powers” are. – It’s actually not really their fault, this tech is generations ahead what people were expecting just a few years ago.
I suggest that our language is a pattern that can be replicated perfectly, and that we humans replicate language ourself. I.e. the vast majority of our usage of language is in fact fluff and replication.
Human’s have never needed to question language like this before. Language have been seen as one of the main things that separate us from animals.
A few people have called my questioning “philosophical” and therefore “irrelevant”. It’s an incredibly arrogant and narrow-minded objection.
I don’t think questioning is philosophical nor irrelevant. It’s necessary! I think questioning these dogmas is exactly what will push things forward.
However, if you insist calling this topic “philosophical” you are destroying the possibility for discussions where things are quantified and meticulously examined. Yo are removing yourself from the discussion and any productive conclusions. – You “pray” while others do.
I am not devaluing humans, but rather very sceptical of people’s self-evaluation of their abilities. (As you surely know, suggesting something like that to people is often perceived as a personal attack.)
Again, I have no answers, but I see a need for deeper exploration of the subject.
All I know is that I know “nothing”. (As reference to Socrates, not that I think I am truly clueless.)