I’ve already lamented the term artificial intelligence for where those two words take many minds.
I’ve also called it the ultimate Rorschach test – it is whatever you see in it, or something like that.
But amid the reams of Medium articles, etc. on how to tell AI and human writing apart, I have mentioned in comments what Perplexity points to – that blind tests already have many folks unable to tell the difference, with results pretty close to flip-of-the-coin random chance (50%).
But while many know how Large Language Models are the sum of human output fed to them, and a word uber-prediction machine, not a “thinker” per se, many still see it as this … robotic “other,” a human creation run amok that is somehow wrong, if not downright evil.
Words, of course, carry positive or negative connotations, which can vary from person to person.
But to me, we need yet another way to look at this new tool, which can recall – notice I didn’t say “thinks” or “knows” – the sum of human output and daresay existence – albeit imperfectly (another odd/dumb term, “hallucinations”) – but way, way beyond what the most genius geniuses can recall, due to the inherent nature of brains vs. how we can now store huge amounts of what’s loosely, imprecisely called “data.”
Somehow, it’s all cast as this tug of war for humans’ future, as in one “side” wins, the other loses, flung into the mud, rope burns on their hands. If you’re “for” AI’s future, you’re “against” humans ruling the roost.
And yes, many of those many, many articles talk about how to use AI to one’s advantage. Valuable, insightful stuff.
But if I throw the term “super-human” out there as a way of looking at or labeling where AI already stands, it’s no doubt seen by some as me casting my lot with the AI side of that tug of war – as in, they are “better/smarter” than us and we may just as well give in, surrender, raise the white flag.
No.
When I say AI is “super-human,” I’m also not talking cape and spandex tights, soaring and fighting off the evil-doers. But it no doubt has a positive, even heroic first-blush meaning to many.
So what? Are we going to have to search out Super-Human AI’s “Kryptonite,” so humanity can prevail over the threat of being conquered by robotic overlords?
Um, maybe. (Then there’s a book I’m reading called the “Simulation Hypothesis,” which says we may all be living in a hugely advanced video game, a Star Trek holo-deck – pick your favorite analogy.)
So yes, this is the million and oneth rumination over how to think about AI. Robots of the kind debuting at the upcoming Consumer Electronics Show will take the man vs. machine debate(s) to new heights, and depths.
But I hope we can discuss it, not argue. Passion is great, put-downs not so much.
But hey … we’re only human. For now.
Confessions of an AI Fanboy: How artificial intelligence amazes and dazes, dazzles and frazzles 