TOS Question: ChatGPT

[AKReefing]

Unclear if that is true. I think there is a very small group of people that are very vocal but I would hesitate to extrapolate to say this is the position of everyone on this site.

Yup. One person here was very vocal. Unfortunately, that person was using AI as their posts here.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

Do you think search features in PDFs are being lazy? Is googling something over going to the library and finding a book on a shelf being lazy? These are convenience features to abstract away the fluff so we can focus on the real thinking.

If i search for a word or phrase in a pdf, I don't assume I end up with the full point of the article.

 

[AKReefing]

Unclear if that is true. I think there is a very small group of people that are very vocal but I would hesitate to extrapolate to say this is the position of everyone on this site.

Here's a thought. Go start your own site that's run by an AI engine. Aggressively advocating for something the mod has already ruled against is just antagonizing the rest of us.

 

[mizimmer90]

I suppose you also prefer trailers over movies... some of us actually appreciate following a thread and reading all the info posted. That's kind of what a forum is all about (as opposed to a reference site)

I prefer both as they each fill a different role. I like watching trailers to determine if a movie is worth watching. Similarly I use AI summaries to determine if a paper is relevant for me and to get a high level view before diving into the details.

Even after having read every word I might have a question like, "did the authors mention X or have data showing Y?" Then I will be pointed to exactly where in the paper that was said. I can then read that section in more detail.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Could you expand on that?

Certainly.

That very response is just a par for the course deflection from you and at least the third time that you have used it in this very thread when somebody has confronted your opinion or response.

 

[AKReefing]

Isn't that the plan? I've seen enough science fiction come true in my lifetime this is actually a bit scary.

Except we've all seen the news stories about certain search engines and ChatGPT coming up with biased answers. Without people calling them out, can you imagine where we'd be?

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I prefer both as they each fill a different role. I like watching trailers to determine if a movie is worth watching. Similarly I use AI summaries to determine if a paper is relevant for me and to get a high level view before diving into the details.

Even after having read every word I might have a question like, "did the authors mention X or have data showing Y?" Then I will be pointed to exactly where in the paper that was said. I can then read that section in more detail.

You're still missing the point. Please go back to post #1 to understand what the rest of us are actually trying to discuss.
No one has said "any use of AI is bad" and we all understand how to use it for our own purposes... just don't proclaim the AI summaries as "truth" or as your own experience.

 

[mizimmer90]

Here's a thought. Go start your own site that's run by an AI engine. Aggressively advocating for something the mod has already ruled against is just antagonizing the rest of us.

Maybe you missed the part where I agreed that copying and pasting chatGPT responses is not the right use case?

I'm discussing the value of other AI features (atrached to reef2reef) that would benefit users by highlighting various ideas or elaborating on them in a side panels. This would help those reading along to follow the arguments or to search for where and what was said. All modern companies are looking for ways to include these features because they're valuable.

 

[twentyleagues]

It's about speed and efficiency. AI is a tool not a replacement. If you use it properly, you will read, think, and understand even more! How cool to use it to find the important threads, or summarize the arguments being made for those who don't understand the context/background.

I am seeing this just going round and round. My question if you saw any of the responses from the person of interest is do you think any of that was properly given information that was "vetted" before being posted by someone with enough background knowledge to discern fact from fiction?

It seems that is one major issue with using AI to "broaden" the ability to supply answers to more complex questions, Can the user verify the "correctness" of AI answers? If no, its not AIs fault its on the person using it.

I use ChatGPT to help generate fiction scenarios, cities, environments, worlds no one or nothing is getting hurt if its wrong and I cant tell, its fiction its how I want it and those that are involved either like it or dont. IMO it has been a great tool to broaden my ideas and get feedback from. I can see how it works being very useful kinda like how google was when first introduced but for life-or-death situation naw.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

Maybe you missed the part where I agreed that copying and pasting chatGPT responses is not the right use case?

I'm discussing the value of other AI features (atrached to reef2reef) that would benefit users by highlighting various ideas or elaborating on them in a side panels. This would help those reading along to follow the arguments or to search for where and what was said. All modern companies are looking for ways to include these features because they're valuable.

Again, just no.

 

[mizimmer90]

You're still missing the point. Please go back to post #1 to understand what the rest of us are actually trying to discuss.
No one has said "any use of AI is bad" and we all understand how to use it for our own purposes... just don't proclaim the AI summaries as "truth" or as your own experience.

To be clear, I think we're in agreement. Ive tried to repeatedly say that AI is a valuable "tool". I'm advocating for some other use cases for AI tied into this site (not as posting into threads)

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

To be clear, I think we're in agreement. Ive tried to repeatedly say that AI is a valuable "tool". I'm advocating for some other use cases for AI tied into this site (not as posting into threads)

Then start a new thread (preferably in the Lounge sub forum)

 

[Tahoe61]

don't want public opinion to slip due to a misunderstanding of the value added.

Please stop inferring we don't understand. That's the insulting part, the you know better part. One can be inherently opposed to the use of ChatGPT in a forum and not be luddite.

 

[revhtree]

I suppose you also prefer trailers over movies... some of us actually appreciate following a thread and reading all the info posted. That's kind of what a forum is all about (as opposed to a reference site)

Well said!

 

[twentyleagues]

Isn't that the plan? I've seen enough science fiction come true in my lifetime this is actually a bit scary.

I had to LOL at this. I have always been a big fan of most anything scifi related. I spent a lot of time with my grandmother when I was young she hated the scifi stuff. I remember watching Star Trek and them communicating vast distances via wireless devices just sent her into a tizzy (also the lack of on screen bathrooms for some reason). She unfortunately passed before the use of cell phones became mainstream. I think about those interactions almost anytime I use my cell phone. I wonder what she would think about all this AI stuff?

 

[AKReefing]

I'm advocating for some other use cases for AI tied into this site (not as posting into threads)

Spoken like a coder. Perhaps you can use less techno-pretentious terms in a saltwater hobby forum?

 

[mizimmer90]

Please stop inferring we don't understand. That's the insulting part, the you know better part. One can be inherently opposed to the use of ChatGPT in a forum and not be luddite.

What did I infer? I have worked hard to only address the comments that have been posted. If you understand the value of AI and think the post doesn't apply to you, keep scrolling?

 

[Matt L]

Funny how the anonymity of the Internet makes people go bonkers online, when they'd never be so bold as to have these kinds of interactions face-to-face.

Not everyone here is anon. A lot of members have posts explaining who they are. But it is not hard to research who is who on here.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Certainly.

That very response is just a par for the course deflection from you and at least the third time that you have used it in this very thread when somebody has confronted your opinion or response.

Did you had to use Ai to count how many times I’ve used that frase?

 

[Dom]

yeah, I’ll pass on this. I think it’s hard enough for a newbie to discern. Someone with a million likes, badges, check marks, gold stars, rainbow colored names, etc can (and sometimes do) post bad advice (as do I I’m sure, no one’s perfect). Just as someone that just joined and has zero history can post excellent advice.

But none of what you mention is a valid for assessing the quality of information coming from a given user.

This is why a separate and new grading system would be required.

And the beauty of it is that you can choose to use the vetting or not.