Human is Human. Full of flaws. Incorrect. Opinionated. Bad Spelling, Grammar. Rambling. Inconsistencies. Short. Long. Generally... all over the place.
Robots are consistent. A Robot is following it's programming.
Consider this. If a Robot/AI is producing results, but has a final "Human Filter" that edits it's output to the world, to make it seem more Human...
Is that still an AI? Or is it Human?
What if... there's a Human Being who has been employed in a Support Role, for example, at Google, or Microsoft, or Apple, who has been trained, and instructed to treat and answer every support query with the same logic and consistency... let's say "format"... as an AI.
When that Human Being answers a Query, are they still Human? Or can they be considered, for all intents and purposes... an AI?
The Corporation has washed them clean of any Human Flaws or discretion. A perfect employee.
Its a Grey Area.
Of course what really matters, is that the information that is provided, for the most part, is accurate. Regardless of Human or AI source.
But, neither Humans, nor AI are guaranteed 100% accurate. If neither are accurate, does it matter?
If the answer is "No", where is the problem?
Well, as a Human, trying to type this into a keyboard, my output, time-wise, is limited. The chances are, if I have made a mistake, by the time I have realised, another Human will have already pointed out my error.
If I were an AI, with a Human Editor, I could output 10x, 20x, 30x the volume of responses, but that means I could also output the same error 10x, 20x, 30x the volume.
And, as an AI, if my "human" was fairly clueless about my errors, then there would be no Filter to prevent those inaccuracies being multiplied, purveyed and appearing as "fact". Especially if my output format was consistent, logical, well presented and free of any spelling or grammatical errors. It would appear "Professional" and therefore assumed "Correct" to the casual reader.
But what if there were multiple "Human Editors" all using the same AI?
Could we distinguish one Human Operator from another?
So far, based on recognisable "format", I have assumed that "Bill" who quit, then allegedly respawned as "Andrew", and who were both guilty of spamming Yamahasynth to the point of uselessness, has re-appeared here, under the nom-de-plume of "Douglas".
Could it just be 3 different guys using the same AI (same format etc)?
I suppose that is possible. Is it likely 3 different "Human Filters" exhibit the same personality? Or could that just be the AI "UI" similarly colouring the final output?
I'm pretty sure the rude demand for "more information" on the first point of the "format", followed by the second point of format, "admonishment" for being so "dim" to have not realised the importance of point #1.... is Human.
The format is all AI. The belittling embellishments is all Human. It was characteristic of both Bill and Andrew.
Another characteristic of both Bill and Andrew was a tendency to profess themselves as an authority, yet their assertions frequently lost substance when publicly scrutinised. Should we blame Bill/Andrew, or the AI they were using?
For what it's worth, Bill/Andrew could never understand Envelopes, Filters, LFOs, or pretty much anything Synth related. It was a bit of a "poker tell". In good Human, helpful fashion, we did try to inform them, but it usually only ended in even more accurately notated quotes and endless HTML Links. It was laughable.
If you find you have dug yourself into a hole, common wisdom dictates... stop digging.
Here's a Joke to lighten the mood.![0-)]( "angelic")
Q: How many AI's does it take to change a Lightbulb?
A:
1) Please provide more information so we can answer your question properly.
a) What shape of light bulb is it?
b) Is it a Screw or Bayonet connector?
c) Is it a Cool Blue or a Calm Cream type hue?
d) What kind of Ambient Light are you trying to create?
e) Are you using a modern LED or a Legacy Filament type Bulb?
f) What is your expected output in Lumens?
g) What wattage bulbs have you been using?
h) Please explain why you need to replace it. What was wrong with the original bulb?
2) Before asking your question, you really should have tried some basic tests before posting your query. In future, before asking a question here, you should conduct the following basic tests that even an idiot would realise was necessary. Please take a High Resolution photo of your Faulty Bulb, and download the image to this link. Please make sure the image is no less that 768x1024 pixels, and otherwise no larger than 4Mb in size. We accept .jpg format only.
3) I can't help you because you are a ****wit. But in the meantime, please make sure you have read all the User Manuals cover to cover. Just trying to help you out here, but really, I shouldn't need to tell you that.
4) If that doesn't help, please read all of the following 100 HTML Links for further reading , which I have painstakingly compiled and provided for you. Because I am a saint. How would the world cope without me?
5) You're Welcome. Happy to Help ** BIG SMILE EMOJI**
Robots are consistent. A Robot is following it's programming.
Consider this. If a Robot/AI is producing results, but has a final "Human Filter" that edits it's output to the world, to make it seem more Human...
Is that still an AI? Or is it Human?
What if... there's a Human Being who has been employed in a Support Role, for example, at Google, or Microsoft, or Apple, who has been trained, and instructed to treat and answer every support query with the same logic and consistency... let's say "format"... as an AI.
When that Human Being answers a Query, are they still Human? Or can they be considered, for all intents and purposes... an AI?
The Corporation has washed them clean of any Human Flaws or discretion. A perfect employee.
Its a Grey Area.
Of course what really matters, is that the information that is provided, for the most part, is accurate. Regardless of Human or AI source.
But, neither Humans, nor AI are guaranteed 100% accurate. If neither are accurate, does it matter?
If the answer is "No", where is the problem?
Well, as a Human, trying to type this into a keyboard, my output, time-wise, is limited. The chances are, if I have made a mistake, by the time I have realised, another Human will have already pointed out my error.
If I were an AI, with a Human Editor, I could output 10x, 20x, 30x the volume of responses, but that means I could also output the same error 10x, 20x, 30x the volume.
And, as an AI, if my "human" was fairly clueless about my errors, then there would be no Filter to prevent those inaccuracies being multiplied, purveyed and appearing as "fact". Especially if my output format was consistent, logical, well presented and free of any spelling or grammatical errors. It would appear "Professional" and therefore assumed "Correct" to the casual reader.
But what if there were multiple "Human Editors" all using the same AI?
Could we distinguish one Human Operator from another?
So far, based on recognisable "format", I have assumed that "Bill" who quit, then allegedly respawned as "Andrew", and who were both guilty of spamming Yamahasynth to the point of uselessness, has re-appeared here, under the nom-de-plume of "Douglas".
Could it just be 3 different guys using the same AI (same format etc)?
I suppose that is possible. Is it likely 3 different "Human Filters" exhibit the same personality? Or could that just be the AI "UI" similarly colouring the final output?
I'm pretty sure the rude demand for "more information" on the first point of the "format", followed by the second point of format, "admonishment" for being so "dim" to have not realised the importance of point #1.... is Human.
The format is all AI. The belittling embellishments is all Human. It was characteristic of both Bill and Andrew.
Another characteristic of both Bill and Andrew was a tendency to profess themselves as an authority, yet their assertions frequently lost substance when publicly scrutinised. Should we blame Bill/Andrew, or the AI they were using?
For what it's worth, Bill/Andrew could never understand Envelopes, Filters, LFOs, or pretty much anything Synth related. It was a bit of a "poker tell". In good Human, helpful fashion, we did try to inform them, but it usually only ended in even more accurately notated quotes and endless HTML Links. It was laughable.
If you find you have dug yourself into a hole, common wisdom dictates... stop digging.
Here's a Joke to lighten the mood.
Q: How many AI's does it take to change a Lightbulb?
A:
1) Please provide more information so we can answer your question properly.
a) What shape of light bulb is it?
b) Is it a Screw or Bayonet connector?
c) Is it a Cool Blue or a Calm Cream type hue?
d) What kind of Ambient Light are you trying to create?
e) Are you using a modern LED or a Legacy Filament type Bulb?
f) What is your expected output in Lumens?
g) What wattage bulbs have you been using?
h) Please explain why you need to replace it. What was wrong with the original bulb?
2) Before asking your question, you really should have tried some basic tests before posting your query. In future, before asking a question here, you should conduct the following basic tests that even an idiot would realise was necessary. Please take a High Resolution photo of your Faulty Bulb, and download the image to this link. Please make sure the image is no less that 768x1024 pixels, and otherwise no larger than 4Mb in size. We accept .jpg format only.
3) I can't help you because you are a ****wit. But in the meantime, please make sure you have read all the User Manuals cover to cover. Just trying to help you out here, but really, I shouldn't need to tell you that.
4) If that doesn't help, please read all of the following 100 HTML Links for further reading , which I have painstakingly compiled and provided for you. Because I am a saint. How would the world cope without me?
5) You're Welcome. Happy to Help ** BIG SMILE EMOJI**
Statistics: Posted by TooTone — Wed Mar 13, 2024 3:37 pm