The point you were arguing yesterday was wrong. If you want to say “yeah, I didn’t understand what I was talking about; I have now learned a lot and I understand why GPT isn’t useful in the way that I thought it was,” you should just say that.
It’s actually admirable that he’s taken in new information and refined his position, but the problem is he won’t admit that he’s doing it. And then projecting his stubborn insistence onto others.
Without a demonstration of understanding that his previous position was based in error, I don’t actually know if he has refined his position or is just telling people what he thinks they want to hear.
Ah, apparently he’s put me on a mute list on the basis that I … *peers* … “seek to take away assistive technologies like GPTs and other machine learning technologies, and thus seek to strip people of their voices, or who are ignorantly against blockchain technology and other innovative technologies”
I just finished a steampunk/alt history series where Ludd was successful, and the ensuing society had strict prohibitions on "unseemly technology" which did not "benefit the common man". The Patent Office is the law enforcement of the day. Pretty fun read.
Aw damn, I didn't make that one _or_ this other one he has and probably forgot about after he calmed down from the huff I assume he was in when he made it.
Being against GPT doesn’t “strip people of their voices”. GPT is like a fey who stole other people’s voices, then permits others to command it to speak in a stolen voice.
1/2
2/2 If you can write or draw, write or draw. If you can’t, accept it. Claiming “AI” allows you to create is like buying a used baseball trophy, putting it on a shelf, and claiming it makes you a champion.
I'm reminded of Thomas Pynchon's 1984 essay "Is It OK to Be a Luddite?" Of course, the answer is yes, and the essay concludes with "Down with all kings but King Ludd!"
archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes....
Hmmm.... The entire conversation has been about how these things don't do stuff that's at all core to the task of lawyering. I think you're mistaking that for Luddism, technophobia, stick-in-the-mud buggy whip manufacturer fetishism, or something. Instead of people understanding their own work.
