Why I'm snarky about #AI hype of late 1. Artifice is of humans. So what's is intelligence and how is it qualified or quantified. Called smart a lot, I'm truly impossibly stupid far more often. 2. Seems limited to short term personal gain over long term human growth and unity.
3
1
11
I’ve been playing with these AI “tools” And I use that term loosely. Regarding ChatGPT: There’s just an element of randomness and then spewing back material from a large database, but if you look at it from a critical viewpoint, The underlying substance is garbage.
3
1
I'm not impressed at all and I don't think it's intelligent if one could measure that. The art sometimes has been interesting but only so much the writing horrifies me both from prompt and the idea that it can be used in place of education is just appalling
1
1
The most I can say about it is that, if I feed a text that I wrote it is sort of helpful in reducing it to plain language (plain language is a problem for me). But even then I can’t use it as it provides. ChatGPT absolutely does not have any form of discriminating intelligence.
2
1
Replying to @MyndexResearch
What do you mean when you say plain language? I ask because of the dissonance as a linguist as to what that means to you rather than me or applied to let's say accessibility or literacy

Mar 20, 2023 · 5:54 PM UTC

1
1
Replying to @mholzschlag
Regarding vision and contrast, I have been criticized as being "difficult to parse". And WCAG 3 has the premise of a plain language description. What I find challenging is taking a complicated, nuanced subject (vision/contrast) and reducing it to a useful soundbite.
1
1
Okay got it and that is a very hard thing to do because what works for one doesn't work for the other we've been challenged by that in accessibility for a very long time indeed I do not find the results understandable to me of course people don't find me understandable either ;-)
1
1
more replies