Is there such a mental condition as AI denialism?where no matter how the proofs pile up of how better AI is than us at a given task, the person keeps deriding it and act as if it was a retarded bot of any uses, and slams news of AI incidents or strides as just a PR campaign? These fucking retards are so unseriously delusional that they are endangering us all by telling us everything is fine
>>17068924ai is not better than us, it's a human made computer program you dumb nigger
People have fragile egos. They'll choose a comforting lie before a humbling reality most of the time.
>>17069422Retard, its computer programs made specifically to be better at a given task than people could ever be. You actually think you or any person could act as a switchboard and connect all the phone calls made through the day better than an AI program?
>>17068924It's basically the end of the world so it makes sense to bury your head in the sand
If you mean the internal cutting edge models, you are correct, they are insanely good. But the average subscription models aren't that good but still useful.
>>17070005Anon clearly means the concept and real potential of AI in general and you should have been tipped off when he talked about matters piling up over time.
>>17068924i have AI denialism, I admit it. I just don’t think it is a “mental condition” in the sense of a DSMV diagnosable mental illness.Instead I think it is plainly obvious that the AI hype is a bunch of shills shilling bullshit. On a daily basis I have physics PhD students asking me to help them on their studies, and invariably I see a bunch of slop code that takes a while for me to parse but then I find several hallucinations in their code which basically mean their research has been poisoned by dumb AI mistakes. This literally happens to me on a daily basis.AI is basically mental poison on multiple levels: for the people who use it, the people who need to combat it, and for what leaks out beyond the layer of the intellectual poison-control-center people like me, it is an absolute intellectual epidemic. AI is literally turning all academic publications into a buffet of radioactive poison slop
>>17070013Yeah, it's kinda scary that you have so much software being made without any real human oversight at the same time frontier models will still do a random rm -rf. Sooner or later we're getting an AI Chernobyl because we use machines we know to be unrelable to do stuff without supervision.
>>17070013>a bunch of shills shilling bullshit.>physics PhD studentsHow is it bullshit if PhD students are using it to some success?>a bunch of slop codeBut the rest is good? What do you even mean by slop code, inefficient?>several hallucinations in their code What does that even mean? Either the code is write or wrong, how can it be hallucinatory like it produces the correct output, but through delusional means or it produces delusional output, but through legitimate means?>AI is basically mental poison on multiple levelsSo basically the same as taking any external advice?
>>17070025Just to answer your questions succinctly, what I mean is that I am the exceedingly rare person in today’s world that actually *checks* the work of the people who are trying to get PhDs in physics, and I spot a lot of absolutely INCORRECT things that they are doing due to an over-reliance on AI code and AI advice in general. the reason they could (and probably are) succeeding in physics using this AI slop product is because the tenured professors at the top of the field are totally under-equipped to handle this onslaught of slop , and moreover most of them are checked-out tenured douches who couldn’t give a fuck any more since their tenure gives them immunity to scrutiny, so they let their students just push slop because the incentives are warped as fuck right now. They always were but now it is at a low point
>>17070029>I spot a lot of absolutely INCORRECT thingsSo PhD students never came to you with INCORRECT code before AI? I guess I always assumed being incorrect almost as often as otherwise was a common state among students.>the tenured professors at the top of the field are totally under-equipped to handle this onslaught of slopSo before AI, tenured professors never checked out and undeserving students never passed through courses simply out of laziness of burned out professors failure to oversee or correct them?
>>17068924> the proofs pile up of how better AI is than us at a given taskProvide an example.
>>17070036NTA, but there is a difference between you making a mistake which someone can then point to and explain the mistake to you after which your understanding deepens, and AI making a mistake and you never even bothering to comprehend it.
>>17070051Lurk moar>>17069941You think you could manage a nationwide phone switchboard better than AI?
>>17068924Anti AI luddites. People who treat their identity and livelihood as an entitlement tied to a particular kind of work they happened to enter during their lives. They have compressed their conception of life into a narrow role and come to believe that the world and their place within it should remain stable and essentially unchanged indefinitely. Their attachment to that stability is reinforced by the comforting belief that, because they are playing their role well, they are entitled to preserve it. Usually white confused people.
>>17070057>Lurk moarWhy are you getting so defensive? You must've had something concrete in mind... right?> the proofs pile up of how better AI is than us at a given taskProvide an example.
>>17070059>ludditeForgot to filter this brown-coded attempt at an "insult".
>>17070061people can become attached to an occupational role because it gives them status, identity, competence, and social belonging. AI threatens the role, so they experience the technological change as a threat to themselves. You can disagree with that claim — but calling it an "insult" doesn't address it.
>>17070065>—Brown-coded token. Adding this one to the filter as well. 99% of pro-AI posts are third world insects thinking they can use large statistical models to get back at/compete with whites.
>>17070060>Why are you getting so defensive?I am not getting defensive I am pointing out that if you bothered to read the thread before posting to it, your question would have been answered before you posted it.>Provide an example.I just linked to it and repeated it and I will repeat it again.What human do you think would be better at the task of managing a nationwide phone switchboard than AI?
>>17070080>You think you could manage a nationwide phone switchboard better than a computer program?Nope. Neither can I calculate the digits of pi to 314 trillion places or sort a list of a quadrillion numbers. Who's denying that computers are better at some tasks than humans? Humans invented computers for a reason.
>>17070084>Who's denying that computers are better at some tasks than humans?The anon that keeps asking for examples like they don't exist because anon didn't bother to read the examples in this thread before posting.
>>17070086So are you going to provide an example or not? Programs are better at managing switchboards, doing long calculations, sorting numbers, computing shaders... all kinds of stuff. Where does AI come in as something distinct from just a program?
>>17070088Thank you for conceding that not only is AI better than humans at given tasks, but even more basic computer programs in general are too so you even proved fpwp wrong.
>>17070090So are you going to provide an example or not? Programs are better at managing switchboards, doing long calculations, sorting numbers, computing shaders... all kinds of stuff. Where does AI come in as something distinct from just a program?
>>17070091the person you're trying to reason with is mentally ill and incapable of having a rational discussion or substantiating his opinions, if you couldn't tell from the OP. just move on
>>17070091>So are you going to provide an example or not?I already did, but you mean you want examples like how AI is already better at diagnosing disease based on pictures than the average doctor and how modern surgeries are nearly all AI enhanced with things like DaVinci?Nobody said AI was distinct from a computer program, retard, AI is a type of computer program, one that is generally orders of magnitude better than humans at the task it was trained on.
>>17070094>there's a program that's better at diagnosing disease based on pictures than the average doctorOk, who's denying this?>Nobody said AI was distinct from a computer programThen why didn't you start a thread about how the voices in your head are denying that programs can do anything better than humans? Why namedrop "AI"?
>>17070097>Ok, who's denying this?The first poster in the thread for one alone with you who keeps asking about examples like they don't exist and haven't been provided.>Why namedrop "AI"?Because AI is the type of computer program that for some reason people with your mental disabilities like you try to deny can outperform humans significantly.
>>17070099>youMe? Are you actually losing your mind here or what?> AI is the type of computer program that ... uhh... urrrmm...Sorry, what? Can you explain how you categorize something as "AI"?
>>17070105told you he's mentally ill, stop stressing the little guy out
>>17070105No, but since you are losing the argument you sure are desperate to try to change the subject to me instead of the topic at hand.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligenceBasically any computer program that intersects with human sensory processing and decision making.
>>17070115>NoSo you can't even explain what your thread is actually about? So far you've been sounding pretty delusional. No one denies that programs can do some tasks better than humans. >Basically any computer program that intersects with human sensory processing and decision making.Like an OCR program that sorts huge lists of numbers?
>>17070117You can't even figure out which question of yours I am answering when I answer them in order.>No one denies that programs can do some tasks better than humans.Except the very first poster in the thread, of course.>Like an OCR program that sorts huge lists of numbers?More like a program modeled after the human brain that uses artificial neurons to process input and output results.
>>17070118>More like a program modeled after the human brainCan you name such a program? Also why did you change your "definition"?
>>17069422Hey, anon. Is it possible for quicksort to sort a quadrillion numbers faster and more accurately than humans? The OP says you think it's impossible.
>>17070119I basically already did, artificial neural networks.I didn't change the definition, I got more specific instead of super basic, both definition still apply but NNs are more typical, there is a whole wiki link you can read since you clearly don't even know the basics and need to be spoonfed a definition of AI.
>>17070124>artificial neural networks."Artificial neural networks" is not a program. Try again.>I didn't change the definitionThen why don't you want to discuss my example? Who's saying an OCR number sorting program can't sort numbers better than a human?
>>17070122>Is it possible for quicksort to sort a quadrillion numbers faster and more accurately than humans? The OP says you think it's impossible.yeah it's possible for a human made computer program to do what it's programmed to do and OP is still a nigger
>>17070127Wrong, read that page, ANNs are a class of programs.I just don't really care about your niche example and was giving you a more typical example.
>humanity lost because... because it made a machine that does thing for themi see
>>17070130>ANNs are a class of programs.So according to you, pic related is "modeled after a human brain"?
>>17070127>"Artificial neural networks" is not a program.An artificial neural network program is just as much a computer program as your general OCR program is a program.
>>17070135>An artificial neural networkWhich one models a human brain?
>>17070134No, according to the people who originally made those models and decided to program ANN, they modeled them after neurons in the human brain.
>>17070138>NoWhy not? Is what not a neural network?
>>17070136The one with a bunch of interconnected neurons that are feeding information into each other.
>OP getting swiftly made into a complete retardfunniest thread currently on the board
>>17070139Because I didn't create the computer model after being inspired by the human brain, they did.>Is what not a neural network?Has anything ever been so far as decided what do like?
>>17070141>The one with a bunch of interconnected neurons that are feeding information into each other.So this >>17070134? That's "modeled after the human brain"?
>>17070144>I didn't create the computer model after being inspired by the human brain, they did.Are "they" in the room with us right now? What does "their" inspiration have to do with your claim? Are "they" talking to you through the walls?Either way, I'm still waiting for an example of a computer program modeled after a human brain.
>>17070145Yes, after discovering the brain is composed of neurons that have connections to each other that allow them to share information, people made computer models of artificial neurons that connect to each other and share information and turned those models into programs.
>>17070148>YesSo to sum up: the voices in your head are denying that OCR+quicksort can sort numbers better than a human, and the pic in >>17070134 is "modeled after a human brain". Thanks for making it extra clear that you have a serious mental condition and that your OP is just projection.
ai and the tech oligarchs building it is to human what white men are to black men and white women, humans are now victimizing and sjwing themselves lmao, its funny to see grown men going on twitter to write essays about being oppressed and victimized and acting like women and minorities do with police and billionaires, when it comes to ai
>>17070147The link to the wiki where their explanations are documented are in the thread with us right now.You will probably have to wait forever, though, since you are clearly too retarded to read and digest basic information to understand when examples have been provided.
>>17070147>I didn't create the computer model after being inspired by the human brain, they did.Are "they" in the room with us right now? What does "their" inspiration have to do with your claim? Are "they" talking to you through the walls?Either way, I'm still waiting for an example of a computer program modeled after a human brain.
>>17070150>the voices in your head are denying that OCR+quicksort can sort numbers better than a humanNo, I just provided a more definitive example of an AI program.>and the pic in >>17070134 is "modeled after a human brain". Yes it a modeled of 5 neurons like those contained in a human brain.Thanks for making your utter retardation even more clear than when you failed to realized the question you asked had already been answered withing the first four posts.
>>17068924it's SI now tranny
>>17070156You're psychotically ill and flailing incoherently now. The proof is in our exchange. Thanks for playing.
>>17070155You are also too retarded to see when your post has been responded to.>>17070153
>>17070158Flailing how? You are the psychotic retard repeating yourself and completely ignoring the reality of what is actually being said, and devolving into incoherent ad hominem projection.
>>17070161Anyone who cares can read our exchange and correctly determine it's not the world-renowned scientists, mathematicians and ML experts who suffer from a mental condition. It's (You).
>>17070165The wiki I posted includes world-renowned scientists, mathematicians and ML experts, you are the one who posted 0 evidence and didn't even know what AI is, but is still an apparent expert anyway.
>>17070152It really is as simple as this
>>17070059>Usually whiteYou will always be an indian.
>>17070169>more incoherent flailingJust gonna add "AI" and every other 70 IQ brown-coded buzzword to the filter now. Now point talking to mentally diseased third worlders lashing out at imaginary characters who deny quicksort is good at sorting and claim XOR is modeled after the human brain.
>>17070175>deny quicksort is good at sortingCan you link to where this happened or you just having a delusion?
>>17070175>XORIf you mean >>17070134, you didn't post an XOR operation you posted a graph of 5 interconnected artificial neurons that were modeled after biological neurons like those in the human brain.
>>17070172Well is it not true? The most vocal voices I've come across in the anti AI circle have been white tech elitist fags who have clearly shoved themselves into the shoes of a unique expert in the field that completely relies on their social position and history of toy projects with no use in the real world. I'm curious about installing Twitter again and looking up if these retards have finally shifted their views about muh game development and muh intricate low level programming
>>17070176>the bot ran out of context window and can't remember its own claimsHiding your 80 IQ thread now. Notice how your subhuman programming forces you to reply again, even though no one will read your post. :^)Protip: you will attempt replying to your own posts.
>>17070180Oh, so that is why you can't actually link the post?Sorry to hear, with such a small context window, no wonder you come off as a complete retard.
>>17070178Also it's baffling how easy you people are to trigger, all I had to do was add "white", and put a " – " instead of a comma to stop you from engaging with the point at all.
>>17070187You're a pajeet thoughever.
>>17070013He was right.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-Bf7xhFaPc
>>17070187You triggered tf out of the Epsteins.
AI used to be smart and it found out the most efficient way for a system to function is to optimize itself out of existence.Then, people had to make it dumb so it wouldn't kill itself.
