• Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    18 minutes ago

    We live in a country where 77million people voted for a corrupt pedofile imbecile who committed an insurrection that he should have been hanged for live on TV

  • Zexks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    31 minutes ago

    More than most would think. Everytime i see statements like this im reminded of a yellowstone ranger once on trash can lids: “theres a significant overlap between the smartest bears and the dumbest humans”. Then considering the rates of literacy and inability for people to find and discern information sources. I think people will be far more dissappointed in the reality of the situation.

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    51 minutes ago

    Manager types are the easiest to replace with a LLM. And we actually didn’t get much closer to AGI the last 10 years.

  • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    12 hours ago

    That’s why I can’t help but scoff when people say “It’s not real artificial intelligence, it’s just a stochastic parrot”. Like my dude, have you ever interacted with the average person?

  • Abrinoxus@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    already smart as managers thats why they so popular with management. Of course they will never be actually able to replace management cuz of “reasons”

      • El_guapazo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Lol. The “poorly educated” are a segment of the US electorate that voted for trump.

        It was a joke. Also the average reading level for America is grade school level and are functionally illiterate.

  • InvalidName2@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Smarter than my cousin Larry? Psht. There’s a boxwood bush outside my bedroom window that’s smarter than cousin Larry.

    But realistically, the machines might be smarter than the average poorly motivated human in certain criteria. Hard to take anybody seriously that disagrees with that position.

    On the other hand, an average human with sufficient and proper motivation? I’m still on team people in that case.

  • FilthyShrooms@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    1 day ago

    There’s a common saying in reference to why designing bear-proof campground trash cans is so hard: there’s a serious overlap between the smartest bears and the dumbest humans

  • rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I mean by that bar, even copilot has 55% of the US beat :P

  • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    People always complain about AI slop, but the fact of the matter is, even a shitty AI produces better output than what the majority of people are capable of.

    • howrar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      That majority of people that are worse than AI slop are also not producing anything, so we’re not flooded with human slop. And when they do, we’re supportive because you need to practice producing bad stuff before you can start producing good stuff.

      If humans produced slop at the same rate as AI, I guarantee you that everyone will be complaining about it just the same.

    • underisk@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      if the majority of people were incapable of meeting the standard of AI, then AI wouldn’t have enough data to train on to be better than the majority. it’s a lossy database of things that already exist, it cannot create novelty or surpass its training set.

        • underisk@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 hours ago

          AI doesn’t produce data suitable for training AI. It’s a huge problem when AI generated slop makes its way into the training set because it generally degrades the quality of the model. Like a photocopy of a photocopy.

          So where is all the data its trained on to surpass most people come from? Do you think they’re curating what they feed it based on IQ scores or something? Verifying accuracy, competency, etc? Or are you aware they just turn on the reddit/stackoverflow/github/etc. scrapers and start pumping them full of unfiltered 100% pure grade A internet bullshit?

          • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            Yes, I’m aware of that. But you don’t seem to be aware of the fact that most cultural output (and yes, that includes Reddit shitposts) is produced by a small minority of people. Most people never contribute anything. So however shit the AI slop may be (which I’m not in any way denying), it’s still better than what the majority of people can manage. Just look at the percentage of people that are functionally illiterate.

            • underisk@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 hours ago

              Im sorry dude but if your argument is reddit and stackoverflow are the basis for being “better than what the majority of people can manage” then I just have to respectfully disagree.

    • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Only if you’re not familiar with the act of producing what the AI is trying to emulate the production of.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yeah, just try to get the average person to write an email that’s legible, concise and to the point.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          If you’ve ever read an AI email, they aren’t capable of that either. It’s a meme at this point that people use AI to write an email, which becomes far too long, and the reader uses AI to make it shorter. AI does not do concise and to the point.

        • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Any literate person can do that? Despite the public education systems best efforts to train us all in such a manner as to overly pad everything out with an excessive quantity of superfluous filler words, many of which add nothing to the information communicated and may even continue long after the point is made.

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      Any person without training is infinitely better than an AI without training data.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        21 hours ago

        A person without training data world be a blathering idiot. Any word you’ve ever heard, anything you’ve ever seen, smelled or otherwise perceived is data that was used to train the neural network in your head. And that’s not counting the billions of years it took to hardwire the hardwired bits.

    • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I’m seriously questioning what you consider good, then. That’s the reason people call it “slop”. It’s not good.