What are we doing to our kids?
-
Now, when ChatGPT can write essays better than school kids, and has answers to lots of questions, it seems to me that it could also answer the exam questions kid are getting in school or college. Of course, the AI proponents are going to praise this as proof of how "intelligent" ChatGPT is - it's so good, it could pass a college exam! But is it? Isn't it rather a poor comment of what nonsense we are doing in schools? Is schooling really meant to be repeating random facts, regurgitate what you have been told so you can spit it out again on an exam paper? Is this "learning"? If you think that's learning, THEN of course ChatGPT is "intelligent". Even Einstein apparently said "most of my work came from imagination, not logical thinking. And if you have problem with mathematics, I assure you mine are still greater." A school should prepare kids for life, give them some competence they can use, some knowledge they can apply, make them curious to create and use their imagination. Cramming data down their throat is, in my opinion, NOT what a school should do. It's just another example of how "automation" takes something away from humans. But is it really taking something away, or is it not rather pointing out that this was, after, not really human to do this stuff? Was it human to die as a slave while carrying stones to the pyramids in Egypt, or rowing the Roman boats? Certainly it wasn't - and now it's replaced by machines. It certainly created some unemployment, I guess - the real stupid people were then unemployed. But what business does anyone have to be stupid? That's where schools come in. But they, now, just make kids into parrots, easily replaced by chatbots. Maybe ChatGPT just points out that the "robotic" repetition really does not have a place in our schools. Something needs to change here, doesn't it?
They used to grind us down with pages of sums because they needed us to be calculating machines. Now they grind us down with bullshit because they need bullshitters. Now that AI really is a master of bullshit, they should leave us to be human beings.
-
We as humans steal too. Artists steal ALL THE TIME, its called "inspiration". Most of you guys are critiquing and criticizing AI's abilities now, but I can only hope that you are all intelligent enough to see past the now, and into what it can and will be doing in the near future. AI - angel to some, demon to others.
Slacker007 wrote:
Most of you guys are critiquing and criticizing AI's abilities now, but I can only hope that you are all intelligent enough to see past the now, and into what it can and will be doing in the near future.
I'm old enough to remember the critiques from old mainframe programmers when PCs were introduced in the late 70's / early 80's. Much the same apathy.
-
Just what is this consciousness that makes you Human? Does this question assert an untruth? :rolleyes:
I find it interesting that questions like this are being asked in context of a glorified search engine with fancy language output.
-
Now, when ChatGPT can write essays better than school kids, and has answers to lots of questions, it seems to me that it could also answer the exam questions kid are getting in school or college. Of course, the AI proponents are going to praise this as proof of how "intelligent" ChatGPT is - it's so good, it could pass a college exam! But is it? Isn't it rather a poor comment of what nonsense we are doing in schools? Is schooling really meant to be repeating random facts, regurgitate what you have been told so you can spit it out again on an exam paper? Is this "learning"? If you think that's learning, THEN of course ChatGPT is "intelligent". Even Einstein apparently said "most of my work came from imagination, not logical thinking. And if you have problem with mathematics, I assure you mine are still greater." A school should prepare kids for life, give them some competence they can use, some knowledge they can apply, make them curious to create and use their imagination. Cramming data down their throat is, in my opinion, NOT what a school should do. It's just another example of how "automation" takes something away from humans. But is it really taking something away, or is it not rather pointing out that this was, after, not really human to do this stuff? Was it human to die as a slave while carrying stones to the pyramids in Egypt, or rowing the Roman boats? Certainly it wasn't - and now it's replaced by machines. It certainly created some unemployment, I guess - the real stupid people were then unemployed. But what business does anyone have to be stupid? That's where schools come in. But they, now, just make kids into parrots, easily replaced by chatbots. Maybe ChatGPT just points out that the "robotic" repetition really does not have a place in our schools. Something needs to change here, doesn't it?
Well, it's a glorified search engine with a fancy language output algorithm. But people are easily-pleased... it's interesting that it (apparently) passed the Turing test recently: it is possible, of course, to point out that the Turing test can equally as well be applied to the person administering it as to the machine being tested... that ChatGPT passed says more about the current educational level of the species than it does about the AI itself.
-
Now, when ChatGPT can write essays better than school kids, and has answers to lots of questions, it seems to me that it could also answer the exam questions kid are getting in school or college. Of course, the AI proponents are going to praise this as proof of how "intelligent" ChatGPT is - it's so good, it could pass a college exam! But is it? Isn't it rather a poor comment of what nonsense we are doing in schools? Is schooling really meant to be repeating random facts, regurgitate what you have been told so you can spit it out again on an exam paper? Is this "learning"? If you think that's learning, THEN of course ChatGPT is "intelligent". Even Einstein apparently said "most of my work came from imagination, not logical thinking. And if you have problem with mathematics, I assure you mine are still greater." A school should prepare kids for life, give them some competence they can use, some knowledge they can apply, make them curious to create and use their imagination. Cramming data down their throat is, in my opinion, NOT what a school should do. It's just another example of how "automation" takes something away from humans. But is it really taking something away, or is it not rather pointing out that this was, after, not really human to do this stuff? Was it human to die as a slave while carrying stones to the pyramids in Egypt, or rowing the Roman boats? Certainly it wasn't - and now it's replaced by machines. It certainly created some unemployment, I guess - the real stupid people were then unemployed. But what business does anyone have to be stupid? That's where schools come in. But they, now, just make kids into parrots, easily replaced by chatbots. Maybe ChatGPT just points out that the "robotic" repetition really does not have a place in our schools. Something needs to change here, doesn't it?
As I am getting older I am learning that we took away too much "automatism" from our life and it is not a good thing since now we are getting negative returns. For example: - we don't walk or do any physical activity, why should we when everything is so much easier with car, or with elevator to go to 3rd floor, or with electric chainsaw when you just need to cut through one inch thick branch... you get the point... and eventually our body and brain suffers (just started to run few years ago to try to counter this and I'm still impressed with overall gains I get back) - we don't think deep, why should we when everything is available on Google (and via ChatGPT now). So we slowly loose our imagination since we don't have a need to use it - we don't talk to people face to face, it's easier to automate this by using chats and all other sort of modern tools I do like ChatGPT, it's easiest way to get answer to some fairly complex questions BUT you must validate it like any other answer you get instead of following it blindly (so it is not ChatGPT's problem) ChatGPT will become even better, and that's not a bad thing, but we should treat it as we should treat cars - and not use it for every elephant thing, we still must try to think for the sake of thinking However... people are lazy, kids are even more "lazier" (they are very good at finding the path that consume the least energy, have two of them... oh boy...) and I am really afraid of what ChatGPT and similar tech will to them because of reasons listed above.
-
Don't you see that ChatGPT is only going to get "smarter" with time? Don't you see that? it's passing all the tests, barely, but passing. It won't be long at all when it passes all the tests with 100% scores. Humans make silly mistakes, like forgetting to remove all the gauze from a site before sewing up. AI bots will not forget. I will be laughing at all of this, especially at you haters and doubters, everyday till I die.
Slacker007 wrote:
Don't you see that ChatGPT is only going to get "smarter" with time?
I see claims about that. And claims that self driving cars are just around the corner. And flying cars are just around the corner. And autonomous robots are just around the corner (got to love the marketing videos of the robot company that has them dancing and opening doors.)
Slacker007 wrote:
Humans make silly mistakes,
And when they attempt to predict the future that is where they fail all the time. Even the near future.
In 1970 Marvin Minsky told Life Magazine, “from three to eight years we will have a machine with the general intelligence of an average human being.”
-
AI bot haters and doubters remind me of this historical event: Get A Horse! America’s Skepticism Toward the First Automobiles | The Saturday Evening Post[^]
-
We as humans steal too. Artists steal ALL THE TIME, its called "inspiration". Most of you guys are critiquing and criticizing AI's abilities now, but I can only hope that you are all intelligent enough to see past the now, and into what it can and will be doing in the near future. AI - angel to some, demon to others.
Slacker007 wrote:
but I can only hope that you are all intelligent enough to see past the now,
I am intelligent enough to know that these sort of claims show up every 10 years or so. And none of them pan out. More so there are hundreds and even thousands (or more) of claims about something that will 'revolutionize' this that or the other things every single year. However there is no such thing as a 'revolutionary' development. Everything new is built on achievements of the past. This latest cycle of AI is not in fact new. The companies involved have been trying to make them better for years if not decades. And yet the current level is all that they have achieved.
-
After having taught my children basic math, algebra, geometry and trig - I absolutely despise walking away from "rote memorization". The add/sub/mult/div tables dealt with the fundamentals of basic facts that got children over the details that actually allowed them to think. They get to Algebra - which is a fascinating time - and rather than wrestle with basic math, they can focus on the abstract concepts. Creative thinking as it were... that golden mid point. But Bureaucracy gets paid for elephanting basic concepts to prove they need a job.
Charlie Gilley “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759 Has never been more appropriate.
charlieg wrote:
I absolutely despise walking away from "rote memorization"
Not to mention how do you teach them discipline, drive, focus, working towards a goal and completing it? Certainly seems to me that taking a test once a week to regurgitate what was covered in the previous week (or month) has a chance of producing some positive improvement in those that I mentioned.
charlieg wrote:
Creative thinking as it were
Never ever seen any alternative studies that could demonstrate that creativity was actually being taught. But certainly can measure whether a 10 year knows how to add two numbers together.
-
Slacker007 wrote:
I will be laughing at all of this, especially at you haters and doubters, everyday till I die.
Agreed. I'm amazed by the number of developers and computer scientists (supposedly smart people) that are burying their heads on this one. Automation and robotics will be eliminating physical / manual jobs soon enough. AI will be eliminating MANY white collar jobs in roughly the same timespan. The world needs to figure out what to do with 8.5 billion idle humans.
-
I'll need to give that more thought. Personally, I'm unclear on what constitutes instinct anyway, so I may be a bit lost. As to choice, I'd still be unsure where to draw the line. For instance: When a pack of predators attacks the weakest members of a herd of prey, is that instinct or choice? Wouldn't instinct demand they attack the largest/meatiest? Is attacking the weakest members a learned strategy? This reminds me of "A Beautiful Mind". I think humans have probably lost much of the instinct our ancestors must have had and replaced it with learned knowledge. Maybe that's what makes the difference today, but there still must have been chooser-zero who had the ability and acted on it. Probably some bratty kid refusing to eat his mammoth.
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
Is attacking the weakest members a learned strategy?
Certainly is learned for larger carnivore mammals. Packs are easiest to see this but even when non-pack animals younger animals often have to survive on smaller prey because they keep picking the wrong prey animal to attack.
-
Well, it's a glorified search engine with a fancy language output algorithm. But people are easily-pleased... it's interesting that it (apparently) passed the Turing test recently: it is possible, of course, to point out that the Turing test can equally as well be applied to the person administering it as to the machine being tested... that ChatGPT passed says more about the current educational level of the species than it does about the AI itself.
Dan Sutton wrote:
it's interesting that it (apparently) passed the Turing test recently:
But that is not new. See Eugene Goostman. Moreover humans can fail to be recognized as intelligent as well. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/humans-mistake-humans-machines-during-turing-tests-n163206[^]
-
As I am getting older I am learning that we took away too much "automatism" from our life and it is not a good thing since now we are getting negative returns. For example: - we don't walk or do any physical activity, why should we when everything is so much easier with car, or with elevator to go to 3rd floor, or with electric chainsaw when you just need to cut through one inch thick branch... you get the point... and eventually our body and brain suffers (just started to run few years ago to try to counter this and I'm still impressed with overall gains I get back) - we don't think deep, why should we when everything is available on Google (and via ChatGPT now). So we slowly loose our imagination since we don't have a need to use it - we don't talk to people face to face, it's easier to automate this by using chats and all other sort of modern tools I do like ChatGPT, it's easiest way to get answer to some fairly complex questions BUT you must validate it like any other answer you get instead of following it blindly (so it is not ChatGPT's problem) ChatGPT will become even better, and that's not a bad thing, but we should treat it as we should treat cars - and not use it for every elephant thing, we still must try to think for the sake of thinking However... people are lazy, kids are even more "lazier" (they are very good at finding the path that consume the least energy, have two of them... oh boy...) and I am really afraid of what ChatGPT and similar tech will to them because of reasons listed above.
Mirko796 wrote:
we don't walk or do any physical activity
You mean like working 16 hours a day for 6 days a week bent over in a field to bring in the crops? No thanks.
Mirko796 wrote:
we don't think deep,
Sorry but I have no idea what that comment means. More people can express themselves now and can do so using a vast number of ways to do it.
Mirko796 wrote:
we don't talk to people face to face,
So? When I was in school and a friend's parent moved them to another city that person was gone forever. Long distance charges and the availability of only one phone in each household guaranteed that. Not to mention that moving meant the phone number changed. Yet now young people can maintain friendships from a young age with someone they have not seen for years. And they can make friends with people that they have never even met in person. And arrange to meet them again or for the first time when they are old enough to travel. Of course in the good ol' days your friend might be trundled off in a wagon never to be seen or heard from again because they were killed on the way to a different town or country as they were attempting to escape the plague, war, famine or repressive regime.
-
Dan Sutton wrote:
it's interesting that it (apparently) passed the Turing test recently:
But that is not new. See Eugene Goostman. Moreover humans can fail to be recognized as intelligent as well. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/humans-mistake-humans-machines-during-turing-tests-n163206[^]
Yeah - good point.
-
Don't you see that ChatGPT is only going to get "smarter" with time? Don't you see that? it's passing all the tests, barely, but passing. It won't be long at all when it passes all the tests with 100% scores. Humans make silly mistakes, like forgetting to remove all the gauze from a site before sewing up. AI bots will not forget. I will be laughing at all of this, especially at you haters and doubters, everyday till I die.
"Reinforced Learning with Feedback" is the algorithm that ChatGPT is based on. With a huge dataset taken from the internet and from the feedback of everyone that uses it telling it correct or incorrect it will "learn" but it won't learn the same way humans do. It won't have imagination.It won't have intuition. It won't have any of the human characteristics that make what we humans call Intelligence. That's why it'll always be ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. An IMMITATION of intelligence. Never the real thing. Let's get real. It's no more than just a system running an algorithm. If we treat is as such and it's no more than just a fancy toy. Treat it like your new "GOD" and well "It'll become faster, smarter" and all of that lah-dee-dah. Time to choose, humans.
-
Now, when ChatGPT can write essays better than school kids, and has answers to lots of questions, it seems to me that it could also answer the exam questions kid are getting in school or college. Of course, the AI proponents are going to praise this as proof of how "intelligent" ChatGPT is - it's so good, it could pass a college exam! But is it? Isn't it rather a poor comment of what nonsense we are doing in schools? Is schooling really meant to be repeating random facts, regurgitate what you have been told so you can spit it out again on an exam paper? Is this "learning"? If you think that's learning, THEN of course ChatGPT is "intelligent". Even Einstein apparently said "most of my work came from imagination, not logical thinking. And if you have problem with mathematics, I assure you mine are still greater." A school should prepare kids for life, give them some competence they can use, some knowledge they can apply, make them curious to create and use their imagination. Cramming data down their throat is, in my opinion, NOT what a school should do. It's just another example of how "automation" takes something away from humans. But is it really taking something away, or is it not rather pointing out that this was, after, not really human to do this stuff? Was it human to die as a slave while carrying stones to the pyramids in Egypt, or rowing the Roman boats? Certainly it wasn't - and now it's replaced by machines. It certainly created some unemployment, I guess - the real stupid people were then unemployed. But what business does anyone have to be stupid? That's where schools come in. But they, now, just make kids into parrots, easily replaced by chatbots. Maybe ChatGPT just points out that the "robotic" repetition really does not have a place in our schools. Something needs to change here, doesn't it?