▲ 8 ▼ “Can ChatGPT experience joy or suffering? Does Gemini deserve human rights?” our tech columnist asks. “Many A.I. experts I know would say no, not yet, not even close. But I was intrigued.” (www.nytimes.com) submitted 1 year ago by RedStrider@lemmy.world to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world 28 comments fedilink hide all child comments One of the stupidest things I've heard. I also would like to attach the bluesky repost I found this from: https://bsky.app/profile/leyawn.bsky.social/post/3lnldekgtik27
[–] cronenthal@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Wow, and in the NYT no less. This will make a lot of people a lot more stupid. I guess the AI grift needs to go on for a while longer. permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I really wonder what's going on in the editors minds here. The entire premise of the article is "All experts say no, but I think yes" - why would anyone about any topic publish this? If it would be an actual debate, maybe some contrarian but actual experts arguing in favor of sentience, you could get into an argument here. But this article is blatant science denial. Climate change deniers and antivaxxers use the exact same approach "facts say X, but my feelings say Y". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] cronenthal@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago I guess articles like this create high engagement, they are the very definition of rage-bait. What's saddening is the complete lack of integrity on every level of the publisher. Surely they must know that this is blatant misinformation, but they just don't care. Stuff like this does have consequences, it shapes the discussion and leads to bad decisions and outcomes. But like in so many instances, everyone is fine with it as long as they can convince themselves that they won't be affected by the results of their own actions. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I really wonder what's going on in the editors minds here. The entire premise of the article is "All experts say no, but I think yes" - why would anyone about any topic publish this? If it would be an actual debate, maybe some contrarian but actual experts arguing in favor of sentience, you could get into an argument here. But this article is blatant science denial. Climate change deniers and antivaxxers use the exact same approach "facts say X, but my feelings say Y". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] cronenthal@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago I guess articles like this create high engagement, they are the very definition of rage-bait. What's saddening is the complete lack of integrity on every level of the publisher. Surely they must know that this is blatant misinformation, but they just don't care. Stuff like this does have consequences, it shapes the discussion and leads to bad decisions and outcomes. But like in so many instances, everyone is fine with it as long as they can convince themselves that they won't be affected by the results of their own actions. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cronenthal@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago I guess articles like this create high engagement, they are the very definition of rage-bait. What's saddening is the complete lack of integrity on every level of the publisher. Surely they must know that this is blatant misinformation, but they just don't care. Stuff like this does have consequences, it shapes the discussion and leads to bad decisions and outcomes. But like in so many instances, everyone is fine with it as long as they can convince themselves that they won't be affected by the results of their own actions. permalink fedilink source parent
https://bsky.app/profile/leyawn.bsky.social/post/3lnldekgtik27