Today’s post is my Karen moment. What you will see is the text of Mark Zuckerber’s recent letter on Meta and the future of “superintelligence” Zuck’s letter was then marked up with my initial comments on it, more or less the way I would mark up a student’s paper. What’s missing is a long end comment in which, to a student, I would give a more general overview of what they did well and how they might improve. I’ll spare you that (in this case) lengthy exercise and only tell you that my opening line there might be something like this: “You have a topic that’s of great significance for the moment, and you identify some aspects about the future of AI that are worthy of serious discussion. One thing that does strike me, however, is that there’s an echo of AI-generated writing in the text itself. I’m not saying that you used AI to write it, but it’s interesting to note how the product here reflects certain kinds of AI habits such as generalizations, strawperson arguments, and vague historical categorization….” And now, onto the show:
I’m not convinced, Mark Zuckerberg. Superintelligence as super hype and the same old marketing strategy.
Related Post
Talking to, and about, The WallTalking to, and about, The Wall
Obviously I haven’t been posting much lately. I’d like to say it was because of some sort of “writer’s block,” but that’s not an accurate enough reason. Frankly, I have
Follow-up to “Critical Thinking” postFollow-up to “Critical Thinking” post
In case you were skeptical about my logic on that post about the con game. There’s this little gem from the news this morning that might help persuade you to
Clean up your room!Clean up your room!
Among the more absurd rituals of prison life it the way that staff and administrators react toward inspectors coming to the prison. It serves as an occasion to berate inmates