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
Sketching out the Scarlet LetterSketching out the Scarlet Letter
Sometimes in prison, and ofter after you are out, the criminal justice system pretends to care about “reforming” you. They might offer some rather feeble pass at offering you literacy,
Someone take the mic away from these tech assholes: the case of Mo Gawdat.Someone take the mic away from these tech assholes: the case of Mo Gawdat.
Last week, I had my mind bent by Zuckerberg’s vapid pronouncements on “superintelligence” (including whether he would be able to recognize it if he saw it). Today I’m blown away
A total AI fail on sourcingA total AI fail on sourcing
As a follow-up to my previous post about the MAHA Commission Report and the fabrication of sources by AI, I just wanted to give a quick example of how that
