this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
92 points (86.5% liked)

Technology

74003 readers
3641 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
92
ChatGPT is changing the way we write. Here’s how – and why it’s a problem. (theconversation.com)
submitted 10 months ago by 101@feddit.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 39 points 10 months ago (3 children)

And another thing! Kids these days aren't learning cursive handwriting. It's the death of culture, I tell you.

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There’s this podcast I used to enjoy (I still enjoy it, but they stopped making new episodes) called Build For Tomorrow (previously known as The Pessimists Archive).

It’s all about times in the past where people have freaked out about stuff changing but it all turned out okay.

After having listened to every single episode — some multiple times — I’ve got this sinking feeling that just mocking the worries of the past misses a few important things.

  1. The paradox of risk management. If you have a valid concern, and we collectively do something to respond to it and prevent the damage, it ends up looking as if you were worried over nothing.
  2. Even for inventions that are, overall, beneficial, they can still bring new bad things with them. You can acknowledge both parts at once. When you invent trains, you also invent train crashes. When you invent electricity, you also invent electrocution. That doesn’t mean you need to reject the whole idea, but you need to respond to the new problems.
  3. There are plenty of cases where we have unleashed horrors onto the world while mocking the objections of the pessimists. Lead, PFAS, CFCs, radium paint, etc.

I’m not so sure that the concerns about AI “killing culture” actually are as overblown as the worry about cursive, or record players, or whatever. The closest comparison we have is probably the printing press. And things got so weird with that so quickly that the government claimed a monopoly on it. This could actually be a problem.

[–] mPony@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

you know how banks will say "Past performance of financial securities does not represent potential future performance" or whatever: this is much the same thing. There are plenty of things that people freaked out about that turned out to be nothing much. There are plenty of things that people did not freak out about when they really should have. People are basically shit about telling the difference between them.

[–] blubfisch@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 10 months ago

While i do get this vibe from the headline, the article actually closes with a call to be mindful of the shortcomings of generative AI (while using it)