You must log in or register to comment.

Sieventer t1_j1oxip3 wrote



--FeRing-- t1_j1p28yf wrote

Digital Aristotle - CGP Grey

I am really looking forward to personal AI tutors. I think we'll need human teachers for a good long time for childcare at a minimum. However the issue of classrooms (discussed in the video) is that the teacher is instructing at the right pace for maybe 5 kids in the class. Everyone else is either bored or confused. Having an AI tutor that gives each person 1 on 1 attention would be amazing.


TouchCommercial5022 t1_j1p9lxz wrote

All they do is control the behavior of these chimpanzees; Let's look at an app that makes Axel stay in his seat

The education system as we know it will end in 2030, I hope so. Every person deserves their own personal JARVIS AI that can provide them with proper 1-on-1 mentoring throughout their lives. That would be 10 times the learning rate of each person, and therefore 10 times our species. It wouldn't matter how much money you would have, where you would live, or what resources you would have access to. Every person could eventually get a world class education.

The educational system is so stuck in the past that it is unable to adapt to modern times. This will force your hand and ultimately rethink how students should be assessed


SurroundSwimming3494 t1_j1p4rb3 wrote

Maybe some will express annoyance/displeasure with chatbots, but thinking that AI will be threatening to replace them as early as next year is an overreaction, in my humble opinion.


MarginCalled1 t1_j1p8ia8 wrote

Exactly the kind of opinion that someone who isn't watching closely, or working in a related field would express.

This technology is advancing incredibly fast, we are at an exponential level where every 6 months the technology doubles in ability, which is faster than Moore's law by a factor of 4.

Gasparov and Deep Blue were only facing each other 23 years ago, and someone had to provide physical input of the moves that had happened. (For the younger readers: The original 2D Grand Theft Auto was made the same year, now go watch a 4k YouTube video of graphics modded GTA V)

Now multiply that pace by 4. Welcome to the AI decade.

Semiconductor, memory, and GPU companies have all started installing/using AI to help with chip research, design, materials, processing, factory/laboratory/fabrication physical designs and suggesting novel and promising ideas on all fronts.

More of any of those and AI power increases, which can drive faster, more precise research into AI continuing the multiplicative circle.

At a certain unknown point the AI will be able to read, write, bench, debug, and improve upon itself. These are all tasks that AI is doing at a lower level today. When AI can do all of this, we hit what many people suspect is the singularity, a point in time where we can't predict what will happen after due to the speed of technology advancement.

We are going to see some impressive technological progress in our lifetimes.


SurroundSwimming3494 t1_j1pakf6 wrote

Good points. But to be fair, I said next year, not in 50 or even 10. I don't think what I commented is unreasonable.


Foundation12a t1_j1pcj6v wrote

What would you have said about AI generated art in 2021? Or an AI assistant in 2021?

This technology goes from being a proof of concept with very mild examples to incredible levels of performance within months.


FilthyCommieAccount t1_j1qk5gq wrote

Lol no. Even if we created superhuman AI next year we wouldn't replace teachers in a single year. Humans and large organizations and especially political systems have inertia. It takes time to implement changes. Just imagine the "think of the children!" sentiment you would have to overcome to replace real human teachers with chatbots at the grade school level. I'm not saying it'll never happen but it'll certainly take longer than a year even if the singularity happened tomorrow.


CubeFlipper t1_j1p4trf wrote

Already happening at a conceptual level. Buddy of mine was a teacher, refuses to accept that "robots" could ever replace "the human touch". He's in for a rough ride.


rispondi t1_j1pae96 wrote

I don’t fully agree with this because educational institutions are not only teaching knowledge but also socialize someone into a group, society, nation. You can’t teach the social aspect through interacting only with AI or otherwise you get drones instead of functioning people. Same goes with universities where a function of them is to create a sense of community that goes a long way in life.


Sandbar101 t1_j1oxil6 wrote


Writing, while already incredibly good, has been bot work for a long time now. Writers also usually don’t have an incredibly recognizable ‘style’ so its harder to justify irrational anger.

Video will still take a while. Its getting there, and BOY when it gets there its really gonna get there and shake up a lot, but consistent streamlined stylized and temporally coherent animation is still going to take at least two years imo

Music on the other hand is right around the corner, and VERY stylistically recognizable. Not to mention studio labels have an army of lawyers salivating over it. Will be fun.


FilthyCommieAccount t1_j1p1ppp wrote

I'm not sure how generative AI is going to effect music. It's not that I don't think generative AI can't do as good of a job with music as it can with images, I think it can. The issue is that music has more of a performance component to it than image making does. Basically I think that there is a much higher parasocial aspect with musicians compared to visual artists. Maybe the music and lyrics start getting generated by AI but it's still a person singing it to give it a face for people to identify with.

Hell... Maybe music and songwriting is already somewhat/largely automated and we just don't know about it. Celebs could definitely afford to build music models of their own and keep it under a stack of NDAs.


sideways t1_j1pc0lb wrote

You're right about the parasocial aspect of music... but there's no reason the current generation of LLMs couldn't manage that as well.

If Hatsune Miku can do it already...


FilthyCommieAccount t1_j1qjcuj wrote

Oh I get it with Hatsune Miku I have a friend who is obsessed with her lol. However I think most people want to have a parasocial relationship with an actual person. I know that if I had the choice of watching a human streamer instead of a generated streamer I'd watch the human one even if the content was objectively worse. For art assets, tv shows etc (unless it's a documentary) I don't care. I would just want the best content.


FranciscoJ1618 t1_j1oxdag wrote

Programming. It will be beautiful.

For a long time a lot of people irrationally promoted others to share their source code (imagine you are CocaCola and decide it's a good decision to share your secret recipe LOL). Well, their shared source code was used to train LLMs haha! Specifically Github copilot. What an intelligent idea!

And the promoters will be crucifixed soon when people realize the cult has always been in benefit of companies and now it will be worse. I read somewhere that they are trying to prevent using AI tools to generate code but they have already dug their own grave.

I can't wait for this!


Cr4zko t1_j1ozz46 wrote

Free software isn't a cult. Have a heart here.


FranciscoJ1618 t1_j1p08mv wrote

Yes it is. And always made devs act against their own interests following the directions of the messiah Stallman. Now that devs become obsolete it will be amazing to see him getting exposed.


Cr4zko t1_j1p14c5 wrote

We literally got Linux out of this deal. And thousands of DOOM source ports. Dunno what else frankly since I never dabbled with GPL projects and I don't pay attention to licenses but I think free software made things somewhat better.


FranciscoJ1618 t1_j1p2g8m wrote

Yes, better for corporations that didn't have to pay for windows because the slaves of the cult were working for free for them writing linux haha! At the same time it wasn't profitable to make another new OS because there was a completely free alternative. So, any other project was dead. Amazing!


Cr4zko t1_j1p3t6u wrote

Uh... I'm pretty sure corporations invest billions into Linux every year.


SurroundSwimming3494 t1_j1p459r wrote

>I can't wait for this!

I'm very puzzled by this desire of yours, to say the least.


FranciscoJ1618 t1_j1pal4l wrote

I'm a programmer but hate the cults related to it. Now these cults will make programming die.


Gaudrix t1_j1p4dlb wrote

Mighty strong hate boner you have for programmers.


FranciscoJ1618 t1_j1pai1q wrote

I'm a programmer, just hate the cults that promoted self destructive behaviours.


FilthyCommieAccount t1_j1p157c wrote

Idk man, if programmers start losing jobs I don't think there will be nearly the same sentiment. Programmers/software devs have a history and culture of embracing new technologies because for many of them change is constant. If they get displaced there will be whining for sure but I don't think the majority of them will start trying to smash the looms like artists have. Artists also have a long history of being regressive when it comes to technology. Which is funny because artists are usually considered progressive and open to change. The truth it quite the opposite. They've fought pretty much every single technology innovation in their field. We'll see in the coming years though. Devs are definitely going to start getting displaced by bots in the next few years.


FranciscoJ1618 t1_j1p2y8n wrote

I read somewhere that Stallman is sueing GitHub because of Copilot. Correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe devs do something regardless of a different sentiment, but with less cringe and temper in comparison to artists. I agree with your general view on artists and programmers.

PS: It really backfired to share source code lol.


CubeFlipper t1_j1p4l6z wrote

>It really backfired to share source code lol.

Backfired from whose perspective? Not most devs, you've just agreed to that. Most devs welcome this. If not them, then who else could it backfire for?


FranciscoJ1618 t1_j1paf47 wrote

I'm not sure devs will welcome this when github copilot becomes github autopilot. No more devs! It will be fantastic to see it.


FilthyCommieAccount t1_j1qisag wrote

I mean they obviously won't be happy about being out of a job I just don't think we'll see the overwhelming reaction we're seeing from artist's right now. There's not going to be a "programming is a fundamentally human activity! We need quotas!" type of reaction.


Ne_Nel t1_j1ozshz wrote



Ok_Homework9290 t1_j1p61xg wrote

So we're gonna go from only art in 2022 to ALL fields in 2023? Even when factoring exponentials, this is an outrageous comment. Let's pump the breaks a bit.


Ne_Nel t1_j1p6lqb wrote

All he mentioned. Also, everything he said is art related. Suddenly people believe that art is moving a pencil and those who do it carry human art behind.


Goldisap t1_j1p0qm5 wrote

Any job that is done mainly digitally will be targeted in the next 3 years. Digital work leaves behind a trail of digital assets for a NN to train on. The trades on the other hand don’t leave behind a digital trail and will be much harder to automate. Think carpenters, plumbers, electricians


SnooStrawberries5661 t1_j1p65g5 wrote

I think teachers. ChatGPT has helped me learn in a much better way than regular teaching. It has the answer for every one of my questions.


Ok_Homework9290 t1_j1p7y51 wrote

The problem I see with ChatGPT being used as a tutor is that way too many of its answers are wrong (when asked an objective question), so it's not really trustworthy, so you'd have to verify its answer elsewhere, which is only going to result in a waste of time.

IMO, for it to be trustworthy in this regard, it would have to essentially perfect and perfecting AI takes a MUCH longer time than making it good, so I don't really see it disrupting the education system any time soon (for that and other reasons).


Foundation12a t1_j1pd7w8 wrote

We are not discussing ChatGPT being used as a teacher anymore than we'd be discussing DallE 1 as being an artist.


Cr4zko t1_j1oztbp wrote



Awkward-Skill-6029 t1_j1oxgrn wrote

This will not replace singers, I thought that Vocaloids would destroy real singers, but no. People don't care that this song was sung 100 times before you or it's a bot that mimics you, it's important to them who sings it. This can be seen in the example of the vitubirsh, they sing the same songs.


Ne_Nel t1_j1p04zc wrote

"Singers" were already replaced long ago. And now, anyone would be able to sound like any good singer, probably in real time too. And let me doubt if new AI VSingers wouldn't be liked as real ones soon (Hatsune miku on steroids).


Stippes t1_j1paxbg wrote

Behavioral "control"

Definitely not the next, but down the line, AI will be integrated more into nudges and other forms of behavioral economics. This will pose concrete problems for society at a larger scale than the Cambridge analytica one in 2016.