Ummm, they can’t do that. They have to give you the Rx after the eye exam if you request it

Still gorgeous. Just with added love!

You need to start a rescue so people can help fund your never ending well of kindness…

We are not faced with the possibility of AI supremacy as an accidental consequence of “can we?”

We are willfully and emphatically holding its hand as we welcome it.

The model is learning efficiency while the user is reaffirmed of the initial inaccuracy.

Inverse proportionality of cognition.

All while many scream the warning of our society’s growing illiteracy rate.

This implies the models will continue to adjust and compensate for the user. Which increases the model’s efficiency BUT also reinforces the user’s initial error - the user will become more confident of the viability and accuracy of their personal approach.

It is learning user vernacular “intent.”

These models also become personalized to the user. I’ve watched many celebrate the accuracy of the query:

“Tell me about myself”

You already have it’s just hard to see through your love, the onus wasn’t/isn’t on you. It was ALWAYS on HIM to be better.

The fact that they recognize it was wrong - that’s all you mama.

Kind of telling when in 2015 Google shed its “Don’t be evil” motto.

Replacing it with “Do the right thing”

The “right thing” for whom google?

For whom!?!?

All this points to for me? They had no idea how to argue the merit of their case. As a result they defaulted to AI is “smart!”

The legal word vomit above emerges: well, there’s a lot of ‘legal’ terms so we good…

Ohhh!! The ‘ol ChatGPT drunken lawyer output!

Feed it documents and ask it for a summery.

Cut out prompts and paste.

Ta-Da!

SMFH really?!?

I would also recommend everyone be sure to read the novel’s appendix: Principles of Newspeak.

I fear it is too often overlooked.

I’m also terrified how some of the systems are learning to interpret dialectical intention from consistent errors in the initial prompt. The correction is done without alerting the user to the initial error. Which enforces the validity of the original wording, perpetuating the decline.

The constant intentional conflation of the meaning of words seems like a tactic being embraced on many fronts.

Reading newly proposed changes to the educational standards is a heartbreaking example.

It’s insidious in its design. Everything taught prior to that one lesson? The long time frame is emphasized. So by the time they learn of actual climate change.. oops “trends”… the foundational correlation to the expanse of time is laid

Not just that state either ... It’s Newspeak. Climate “Change” to “trends” then they merrily go about explaining “trends” (plate tectonics, ice ages, etc) for years before a quick one lesson in 8th to include “use of natural resources can effect these trends”

Newspeak is here.

Famous speeches redone with new connotations. Gestures redefined and words given new meaning

We need a hard TANGIBLE copy of history. As memories fade and generations pass.

We need to KNOW what we remember was real

And not what we are told