if the majority of people were incapable of meeting the standard of AI, then AI wouldn’t have enough data to train on to be better than the majority.
if the majority of people were incapable of meeting the standard of AI, then AI wouldn’t have enough data to train on to be better than the majority.
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Most people can’t do that either.
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
That’s exactly what people have done for millennia though. It’s literally the reason you have heat in the winter and aren’t living in a cave.
underisk@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
AI doesn’t produce data suitable for training AI. It’s a huge problem when AI generated slop makes its way into the training set because it generally degrades the quality of the model. Like a photocopy of a photocopy.
So where is all the data its trained on to surpass most people come from? Do you think they’re curating what they feed it based on IQ scores or something? Verifying accuracy, competency, etc? Or are you aware they just turn on the reddit/stackoverflow/github/etc. scrapers and start pumping them full of unfiltered 100% pure grade A internet bullshit?
ulterno@programming.dev 1 day ago
I would assume they rank the stuff by vote-count.
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It’s, I’m aware of that. But you don’t seem to be aware of the fact that most cultural output (and yes, that includes Reddit shitposts) is produced by a small minority of people. Most people never contribute anything. So however shit the AI slop may be (which I’m not in any way denying), it’s still better than what the majority of people can manage. Just look at the percentage of people that are functionally illiterate.
underisk@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Im sorry dude but if your argument is reddit and stackoverflow are the basis for being “better than what the majority of people can manage” then I just have to respectfully disagree.