[ SECRET POST #5981 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5981 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 38 secrets from Secret Submission Post #855.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

It's not in any way an attempt to get support for AI. I don't think that support or opposition of AI should depend on how good the technology is.

In fact, that's basically my central point here: it is bad to make the flaws of AI as it currently exists a cornerstone of your anti-AI argument. Because then where does that leave you if the technology *does* get better? It leaves you up a creek without a paddle.

If you think it's an important point of principle that we defend human creativity and not set up a future where AI is the official source of creating all stories, I think we should make clear-headed arguments in opposition to that possibility. The reason to oppose that possibility is because it would be bad for human beings, not because it's fundamentally impossible for AI technology to ever reach that point. If it's fundamentally impossible for AI technology to ever reach that point, we don't even need to have this conversation in the first place. And more importantly, there's no fundamental justification for drawing a hard line about what AI development can or cannot achieve. And there's plenty of examples in the past of people saying that AI will never be able to achieve something that it later, in fact, achieved.

[(Anonymous)]

I hope that AI gets banned <3

[(Anonymous)]

OK!

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

You're pretending I (and the anon you responded to first) were making an argument that we did not make. No one said the only or primary reason to oppose the current push for AI is because the quality it can produce is crap. What they said, and I agree, is that people championing "replace creativity with AI" arguments seem oblivious to the difference between telling a story and just moving something in front of the audience's face.

And "it can't be done now, but it could be done in the future" is currently the fashionable way to say "we're developing this desirable thing, fund us!" (Or at least don't say things that will make the people who are funding us get cold feet!!) So I'm rather skeptical of your assertion that you're not arguing on behalf of AI.