RE: Distributed Conspiracy
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
results of Gemini
Of all the AI generative apps, you chose Gemini? They recently had a problem with it where it was forcing racial/woke images. Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, Ideogram, etc. don't have that problem. Gemini is relatively new compared to the others, so problems are expected. I remember how AI hands were so horrible a year ago, but now they can generate text to video.
0
0
0.000
I chose it as an example of what the AIs are actually doing. The answers that they give (like ChatGPT) are amalgamations of what it discovers, not truth. It isn't vetted information, even if it sounds plausible. But, many people are using it as if it is true, which means it is influencing decisions still, without the user questioning it deeply.
The closer explanation would be, the data it is fed, and the programming it follows. If it is only fed incorrect data, then it will output wrong information. If it is programmed to focus on racial/woke results, then that will be put out. Like I said, Gemini is relatively new, so there are expected problems to its data/programming. Most of the big AI companies try to make their data accurate, or people won't use/pay for them.
People are the ones creating the ideas AI spits out. Big companies house the people inside social networks where they work tirelessly generating new data nonstop. People will eventually pay to be told what they want to hear. So you have one network that leans this way and another that leans that way. People will eventually pay to hear their own thoughts and not even realize it, as they volunteer their time to create more, hoping to earn a little bit of ad revenue to cover the costs of hearing their own thoughts once AI explains it to them. They won't pay for the one they disagree with. Big companies know this.
Blockchain (Hive) solves this data dilemma. Can fill up the blockchain with every walk of life and all thoughts imaginable. Then AI can offer all ideas, telling you who thinks what, why, and how they came to those conclusions. The data can never change and it's all open to the public rather than being locked behind closed doors with someone at the helm making decisions.
That is a good way to look at how AI can work better with the blockchain technology.
It's been on my mind for awhile. Can also be transparent and show how it's vetting information making it a little more trustworthy since if you don't believe it, one can go look for themselves.
Can take a news story for instance, then take several more published instances of that same event and detect which portions are opinion, sensationalized, can come up with a profile of the author, can scan through comments and reactions. Then without bashing anyone it can sift through the noise and come to a conclusion based in reality. Can strip away the politics for instance while still acknowledging their existence. Seeks to be efficient so you get all sides to the story presented as one.
People will still prefer to go to the sources that effectively tell them what they want to hear though. So it won't change much in that regard. But the rest of the people that don't play into that stuff will finally have reliable sources, at least.
P.S. sorry for butting in. I just found your conversation with @tarazkp interesting and felt like adding to it.
I think this has been happening for a while already. The algorithms of streaming platforms do this, where they generate lists of content that is easy to accept, but doesn't challenge in any way.
That's true. It's blatantly obvious when you check out something like the independent news scene anywhere online really. Doesn't matter which team they're playing for either, it's all the same. Thousands of comments and nobody opposing it. If someone does, several come and shout them out of the room. Fans of information. I wrote about that on a couple of occasions.
The context of that quote above, I didn't word properly. What I meant was in the future people will be selecting which AI source is for them, pay for it, because it's trained to cater to their needs. There will be several options. Say there's only two teams, the basic left and right for example. Some of these corporations will sell both options. Then the people sit there and feed it and train it to be just like them. They've done such a good job of sorting people into piles like laundry as it is, so I expect that to be even more streamlined in the future with AI. And of course, nobody questions it.
That section of society. It boils down to money. It's a large group;a gold mine. Regardless of which side their on. But you can't make money telling people what they don't want to hear. It really is that simple of a business model.