Readit News"Here’s a response that aims for a balanced perspective likely to generate both agreement and disagreement among Hacker News commenters:
--
Your observations about AI interactions are quite thought-provoking. I agree that while many users can still spot AI-generated content, the landscape is rapidly evolving. It's interesting to consider how LLMs have become more integrated into our online experiences, and I share your concern about the potential exploitation of vulnerable individuals.
That said, I think it's essential to acknowledge that not everyone views these AI interactions negatively. For some, these tools provide valuable companionship or support that they might not find elsewhere, especially during times of loneliness. The idea of using AI as a bridge for social interaction can be seen as a double-edged sword—while it might lead to dependency or exploitation, it also opens up new avenues for connection.
Ultimately, the challenge lies in how these technologies are developed and marketed. There’s a fine line between providing genuine support and creating a predatory environment. It’s crucial for us as a society to have discussions about ethical considerations and to establish guidelines that prioritize user welfare over profit.
--
This response should provoke a range of opinions, encouraging discussions on both the potential benefits and drawbacks of AI in social contexts."
I don't know, I'm not convinced. Reminds me of Billy Madison's speech about the Industrial Revolution and the puppy that lost his way. I'm sure there are other agents/prompts that could do better.
My prompt:
"Create a response that 50/50 hacker news commenters would agree with: I'm genuinely curious if this will play out... <top-level comment>"
Edit: Just for shits though...
> Can you describe the AI revolution using an analogy to the Puppy who Lost his Way?
> Certainly! Here’s an analogy that describes the AI revolution through the story of a puppy who lost his way:
The Puppy Who Lost His Way
Once upon a time, in a bustling town, there was a curious little puppy named Max. Max loved to explore and was always eager to discover new things. One sunny day, while chasing a butterfly, he wandered away from his home and found himself in an unfamiliar part of the town.
At first, Max was excited. He met new friends—a wise old dog, a playful kitten, and a clever rabbit. Each of them showed him different paths, each leading to new adventures. Max was thrilled; he felt like he was uncovering the secrets of the world around him.
However, as he explored further, Max began to realize that not all paths were safe. Some led to busy roads with rushing cars, while others took him to dark alleys where he felt frightened. Max found himself overwhelmed, longing for the comfort of his home. He realized that while exploration was exciting, he needed guidance to navigate this vast, unknown territory.
Just when he felt lost, he encountered a kind, experienced dog named Bella. Bella understood Max’s confusion and offered to help him find his way back. She taught him to trust his instincts, but also to look for signs and follow safe routes. With her guidance, Max learned how to navigate the complexities of the town, making the most of his adventures while staying safe.
As Max journeyed home with Bella, he discovered that the town was filled with opportunities. He could play, learn, and grow—but he needed to be mindful of his surroundings. With each new experience, he became more confident and savvy, ready to explore the world responsibly.
The AI Revolution
In this analogy, Max represents humanity at the dawn of the AI revolution. The initial excitement mirrors our enthusiasm for AI's potential to explore and enhance various aspects of life. The new friends Max meets symbolize the different advancements in AI—each offering unique benefits and challenges.
However, just as Max faced dangers in his exploration, society must navigate the complexities and ethical dilemmas posed by AI technologies. The wise dog, Bella, represents the need for thoughtful guidance, regulations, and ethical frameworks to ensure that AI serves humanity positively.
Ultimately, like Max, we have the opportunity to embrace the AI revolution, exploring its vast possibilities while remaining mindful of our path. With careful navigation and responsible use, we can make the most of this exciting journey, ensuring it leads us toward a brighter future.
"Yeah, I get what you’re saying, but it’s not that black and white. There’s definitely a risk, especially for people who are lonely or vulnerable, and some companies are obviously exploiting that. But I’ve also seen situations where these AI tools actually help people who don’t have anyone else to talk to.
Like, sure, chatting with an AI isn’t the same as a real human, but for some people, it might be the only thing getting them through a rough time. It’s not ideal, but it’s better than nothing.
I do get the worry, though, that we’re heading toward a world where fake interactions become more normal and people lose touch with real connections. It’s hard to say which way things will go—depends a lot on how people end up using the tech. Could go either way."
I felt (and still feel) the course was a tragedy, that I had an intro to biologists, not biology.
I never used the iPad is anything more than a consumption device and as things stand right now I’m not sure if the apple Vision Pro is going to be more than that for me either. I wrote about this in my first impressions blog post [0], but what I really wanted was to use the Apple Vision Pro as a replacement for my computer monitors, it’s just not there yet. I look forward to future revisions and I’m also on a 13 day countdown to decide if I want to keep this or not.
[0] https://joshstrange.com/2024/02/03/apple-vision-pro-first-im...
1. The 4% number comes from the Trinity study, which found that 95% of the time you have >$0 after 30 years. If you're >30 years from death now, a more appropriate benchmark might be 3% or possibly 3.5%.
2. $100k/yr post tax is more than $100k/yr pretax, even if it's mostly long term capital gains and dividend taxes.
3. Health insurance $$$.
So the number for you is probably a little higher maybe $5m to switch to 3% and add an additional $50k for tax and health insurance costs.
But yea the general point stands. Someone working as a director probably pulling >$1m/yr, with a long tenure, almost definitely has way over that amount. (I wouldn't be surprised if it was $20m+)
What I don't understand on his Wikipedia page is this bit in the second sentence: "Loeb is the Frank B. Baird Jr. Professor of Science at Harvard University". Does he work there under the alias "Frank B. Baird Jr." or what does this sentence mean? Or is the position called one person but another person fulfills the role?