82,882
edits
Electric monk: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
It is a fine trick to play on ourselves. ''But'' — why be so quick to cede superiority to an algorithm? Is not the magician behind the velvet curtain really ''us''? | It is a fine trick to play on ourselves. ''But'' — why be so quick to cede superiority to an algorithm? Is not the magician behind the velvet curtain really ''us''? | ||
{{imageflex|name=Chat Chat|extension=png|size=400|caption=|align=left|frame=frameless}} | |||
===Update upon Update=== | |||
It seems now — if that godhead of enlightened debate and joustery [[LinkedIn]] is anything to go by — that the moment may have arrived. Per the offering on the left, [[ChatGPT]] bots can now supply your witty repartee, and stunning hot-takes ''for you''. Why go to the trouble of writing your own dreck when you can deploy a robot to do it for you? We have a suspicion that LinkedIn Premium types have been deploying chatbots to write their posts for some time now, so, in a sense, it is only fair we should be allowed to deploy our own boredom machines to read these dismal offerings, and comment on them. Show ''them'' same level of disinterested contempt for their audience that they show us, so to speak. | |||
I know what you are thinking. [[LinkedIn]] [[banter]] is dismal enough already, with out the intervention of the machines. But — per the passionate argument below, once they truly get going, flaming each other, trolling, hotly disputing improvable facts about which no educated professional | |||
==Where are ''our'' bots?== | ==Where are ''our'' bots?== | ||
Someone hijacked the revolution, and we were too distracted to do anything about it. | Someone hijacked the revolution, and we were too distracted to do anything about it. | ||