[HN Gopher] The Public Is Rapidly Turning Against AI, Polling Shows
___________________________________________________________________
The Public Is Rapidly Turning Against AI, Polling Shows
Author : evolve2k
Score : 34 points
Date : 2024-03-08 20:51 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (futurism.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (futurism.com)
| SillyUsername wrote:
| Well of course it does. This is the industrial revolution and
| Luddism all over again.
| ben_w wrote:
| Many of the Luddites' issues were taken up by Marx.
|
| I wonder if, and how, the analogy would play out with AI.
|
| Free software, even if not open sourced, is putting the means
| (and memes) of production into the hands of the workers.
| ElevenLathe wrote:
| Power looms were just putting skilled weavers out of work. AI
| is going to be used to decide if you can go to college or take
| out a loan, what kinds of culture are produced, provide mass-
| customized propaganda to everyone at the whim of anyone with a
| nickel's worth of AWS credits, and it goes on.
|
| They're fundamentally different. I'm in IT and don't think
| there is much to be done about it "taking my job", but
| certainly we need to keep it out of the path of important
| society-defining decisions. It's important to separate these
| two things, and AFAICT the public debate about this -- such as
| it is -- is not.
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| I hate this comparison because the tone of it discounts the
| real human suffering caused by these events. Yes, we are better
| off now. But the transition through the industrial revolution
| caused a lot of pain.
|
| The rise of AI is going to cause real human suffering. Sure, we
| will probably be better off in 100 years. But that's little
| comfort the those that lose their jobs or the ones that get
| crushed under the new AI powered Noble class.
| dorkwood wrote:
| I suppose I missed the part where the mechanised loom makers
| harvested hundreds of millions of books and images without
| permission in order to make their machines work.
| evolve2k wrote:
| I do think this is the blind spot in all of Altmans hyper
| competitive moves.
|
| As a public we've had years of cultural warnings that this tech
| especially needs to be navigated with wisdom and ethical
| consideration.
|
| Trust can initially be quickly gained, but once lost, very hard
| to regain.
|
| I'm not sure about anyone else but I'm already cautious which
| questions I ask Chat GPT and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
| testacpwoek wrote:
| I think the trust comment is the crux of it. When AI can
| suddenly generate photorealistic images and answer any
| question, people wonder what it will be able to do next.
| Generate movies? TV shows? Video games even? And then a lawyer
| gets disbarred because ChatGPT made up cases and people's
| excitement starts to waver. And then people start using
| existing AI to make deepfake porn and people's excitement
| starts to waver. And then AI starts generating photorealistic
| black Nazis, and people's excitement starts to waver again. If
| the negative incidents keep happening but people's lives don't
| get better at the same time thanks to the utility of AI, people
| start asking "Are the downsides worth it?" and "Can we even
| trust the people making this stuff?".
| iwontberude wrote:
| This is why I think RTO is inevitable. We don't know who
| anyone is for sure unless we are in the same room. We don't
| have any privacy for sure unless we are in the same room. I'm
| buying commercial REITs while they are cheap.
| jmathai wrote:
| The article is light on details but it's important to
| differentiate between two kinds of AI.
|
| 1) Deeply integrated into the product. This is what we've mostly
| seen to date. Google Search, Facebook's feed, Amazon results,
| etc. I can see how people are getting tired of these applications
| of AI. My wife asked me how she can search for something without
| it following her around the Internet. I said, "you can't really".
|
| 2) AI as the product. This new set of AI use cases feel quite
| different (for now, read on). Users intentionally interact
| knowing and wanting the AI related value they receive. As all
| novel products, this type of AI will also get so commercialized
| that it's not in the business of solving the user's needs. At
| least not as it's first priority. And people will grow tired of
| it too.
|
| Rinse, repeat.
| JustLurking2022 wrote:
| I think you have it backwards - most people don't know what AI
| as a product really accomplishes. They're probably more
| accepting of products that use AI when it enhances an
| experience they already understand and want.
| Turing_Machine wrote:
| "Shortened question text Throughout the report, question text has
| been edited for readability."
|
| Wait, what?
|
| If it needs to be "shortened for readability" for the report, how
| do we know it wasn't confusing to the respondents in its original
| form?
|
| I mean, maybe it's fine, but push polling is totally a thing.
|
| I don't trust polls unless the writeup prominently features
| details about a) exactly how the subjects were selected, b) the
| exact text of the questions that were asked, and c) exactly how
| the data was collected.
|
| A U.S.-based example: a stranger calls someone on the phone and
| asks them whether they own a firearm, or, alternatively, whether
| they've ever had an abortion. In either case, it's not a safe bet
| that the answer is going to be honest.
|
| Another example: I see that they've collected data for this poll
| in China. I can't believe that strangers cold-calling people in
| China and asking them whether they trust the government is going
| to produce data of any value at all.
| inamberclad wrote:
| I think there's a sense that our personal experiences are being
| hijacked by algorithms. This has been going on for at least a
| decade or two but they've been getting more and more devious and
| extractive as the Internet, and our attention has been heavily
| capitalized upon. Nothing is private. Everything is for sale.
| Your worth is algorithmic, and AI is the biggest and most devious
| algorithm there is.
| reducesuffering wrote:
| What's sad is there were early technologists warning about the
| social media problems, but they were ignored by the 90%
| builders of it and $. Same thing happening all over again,
| except no one thinks Facebook is really helping people.
| Imnimo wrote:
| "Trust in AI is down globally from 61 percent in 2019 to just 53
| percent, per the Edelman poll." I am having a hard time finding
| exactly what this number means in the linked report. I see a "50"
| for AI on page 13 - is that the number that used to be 61?
| ab5tract wrote:
| The truth is that _truths are contentious_. AI simply cannot
| fully convey the discourse around any given topic without
| angering or neglecting one group or another.
|
| This means that the creators of a given AI will necessarily pick
| and choose which "reality" it is going to convey.
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| [dupe]
|
| More discussion on the axios post here:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39616302
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-08 23:01 UTC)