Your views on the influx of AI like ChatGPT?

By now you must have heard of the progression of AI and how the likes of ChatGPT is enabling tech savvies to work faster, while opening the doors for even not so tech savvy to also get work done by providing them tools to assist.

You have AI to assist you code, AI to help you generate art, AI to help you generate logos. With each passing day it's like the phrase "there's an app for that..." is coming true for AI.
Now it's important than ever to have "ideas" then being technically inclined to execute them.

Bill Gates is saying in contextof AIs, and I quote: "In my life time I have seen two demonstrations of technology that struck me as revolutionary. The first time was in 1980, when I was introduced to a GUI - the forerunner of every modern operating system, including Windows. The second big surprise came just last year [...] I knew I had seen the most important advance in technology since the GUI."

So what's the thoughts of fellow 'digitians' about it? Does it scare you? Did you see it as an eventuality? How's your life shaping up to be before and after this AI renaissance?
Let's get started...

I'm not scared. AI is a tool like any other.

Only time will tell how it will shape up. For now, it is a great tool & the evolution of search engines.

Desmond said:
I'm not scared. AI is a tool like any other.

So how are you trying to leverage this tool?
Have you tried some of the AIs? Like used ChatGPT to code faster or used Dall-E/Stable diffusion to generate images or logos?

omega44-xt said:
Only time will tell how it will shape up. For now, it is a great tool & the evolution of search engines.

In my experience every decade or so we are watching history in the making.
For eg, 2000 it was Internet which flew off, then in 2009 it was Bitcoin. Now last year in 2022 it was AI which exploded. But I think the progression of AI is going to be different than any other tech. Why? Let me explain.

I saw this graph which said how AI is going to evolve slow, but once it reaches certain point, it's going to go exponential. Here is the article: *boingboing.net/2015/01/23/the-road-to-superintelligen.html

And this is the graph:

And this graph was 8 years ago. For all we know we may still be in "Present day" shown in the graph or we may very well be later in the "correct prediction" path.
Now the longer we jump into taking advantage of AI, we are going to fall way behind. As someone who are in tech space, we have knowledge and experience on our side.
I want to discuss how we can leverage that optimally.

IMO existing fields where AI can be leveraged will get enhanced. Finance and healthcare come to mind as major fields.

well, biological life forms are fragile anyways, they will go extinct some day. if AI is developed, human legacy of a time will be carried forward by machines.,
:pray:

What if AI be the reason for biological life to go extinct?

How do you think that would happen?

A StarWars fan will understand, AI and Humans can co exist in perfect harmony.

Desmond said:
How do you think that would happen?

Due to bag programming maybe? Some bug?
Due to the simple fact that a robot wouldn't have "ethics" or "emotion", and it can prove to be very fatal.

One classic example is AI deciding to launch nukes all over the world to save earth in response to fulfil a goal of protecting earth, as it would believe humans are earth's biggest threat.

I doubt self-aware AI is even possible anytime soon. At least not for another 100 or so years. Even then there has to be some project specifically to create self-aware AIs.

And even with self-aware AIs, I doubt any sane person would put a country's nukes in the control of an AI. Like how would you even justify doing that.

I thought this thread was about aspect of AI intruding in common man's day to day job and may be taking their jobs away or as Desmond said which sectors will benefit most. But this is turning into sci-fi discussion?

Desmond said:
How do you think that would happen?

I mean, isn't the topic exhausted by sci-fi movies?

Desmond said:
I'm not scared. AI is a tool like any other.

*youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

Vyom said:
Does it scare you?

I mean, in the short term I think it's going to be a great tool, but, the future does look kinda bleak. Especially for the only kind of jobs we thought were safe. Creative works.

Æsoteric Positron said:
I mean, isn't the topic exhausted by sci-fi movies?

*youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

I mean, in the short term I think it's going to be a great tool, but, the future does look kinda bleak. Especially for the only kind of jobs we thought were safe. Creative works.

Yes the topic is covered extensively in fiction. And that video by CGP Grey was amazing. Baffles me to think it was 8 years ago. Desmond is being naive if he thinks this progression of AI is just a new tool. It's kind of a big deal. And the best part is we can't even imagine how fast we are progressing.

Desmond said:
I doubt any sane person would put a country's nukes in the control of an AI. Like how would you even justify doing that.

You would be surprised by how dumb humans can be.

Vyom said:
Yes the topic is covered extensively in fiction. And that video by CGP Grey was amazing. Baffles me to think it was 8 years ago.

Yup, it's that's the video which me into the channel, back in the day. Pretty avid fan of his content in general.

Vyom said:
Desmond is being naive if he thinks this progression of AI is just a new tool. It's kind of a big deal. And the best part is we can't even

I mean could be hard to see how it's different this time when most of this had been a public concern and major parts of economies didn't come under threat regardless. Though, seeing copilot work in real-time by having it hands on... Yeah, that's made it different for me this time. That could write whole code for a working project in a lang. that I didn't even know with help of just a comment. Unnerving.

Though I still don't imagine the impact would be as sci-fi-y, instead slow layoffs and economic instability could be the most tangible effects (given how many people are aspiring to be to bein the tech industry, and would graduate around the same time when AI matures a little bit.). Other effects could be less tangible but as impactful. Did you write this great speech yourself? Or did u use that AI? How would any human know. Its not like you could search the text up online to check plagiarism. Should you care if the speech is really better? Most of our previous "tools" required hard skills to use and leverage them, the reason this has been so popular is it can be used by anyone, like how calculators still require you to understand the problem and put that into a mathematically computable equation, then and then only you can add or multiply things. Imagine how much skill it would require you to type up the problem and write the result. Currently you still have to proofcheck it, but give the AI few years to mature and this shouldn't be in the speculation section

Vyom said:
And the best part is we can't even imagine how fast we are progressing.

Offtopic but, tbh pace of human progess have been just ridiculous, it's a wonder our modern society still continue to work (mostly).

Vyom said:
You would be surprised by how dumb humans can be.

Isn't it humans who built the nukes to destroy each other in the first place and refuse to sign a piece of paper to stop it?

Vyom said:
Due to bag programming maybe? Some bug?
Due to the simple fact that a robot wouldn't have "ethics" or "emotion", and it can prove to be very fatal.

One classic example is AI deciding to launch nukes all over the world to save earth in response to fulfil a goal of protecting earth, as it would believe humans are earth's biggest threat.

thats beyond the capability of a single or a few bugs. mass destruction weapons are protocolled with mutiparty keys to avoid accidental launch.

Desmond said:
I doubt self-aware AI is even possible anytime soon. At least not for another 100 or so years. Even then there has to be some project specifically to create self-aware AIs.

And even with self-aware AIs, I doubt any sane person would put a country's nukes in the control of an AI. Like how would you even justify doing that.

it's a part of the evolution journey. current hardware doesn't look like capable of harboring self conscious AI, but stuff may get changed if quantum computation is developed.

Æsoteric Positron said:
Offtopic but, tbh pace of human progess have been just ridiculous, it's a wonder our modern society still continue to work (mostly).

Isn't it humans who built the nukes to destroy each other in the first place and refuse to sign a piece of paper to stop it?

humans may just evolve into a centralized/discributed single consciousness in far future with the new development and advancement in networking & connectivity.

The recent advancement in AI is a direct result of several magnitudes of improvements in computing power. Something like ChatGPT could be trained on huge amounts of data because of such processor tech advancement. We can thank companies like Intel, Nvidia (I think chat gpt was trained on nvidia gpus) and AMD for it.
In the end, AI is not a buzzword anymore, it's an abstraction, just like regular data structures are an abstraction. We don't build a queue from scratch every time we need to use them, but we use queues and stacks and hashmaps so much, we can't imagine programming without them.
Eventually, ChatGPT and similar stuff would become abstractions and we will build even more impressive products as a direct result of them being accessible to any person with an internet connection.
I have several interesting project ideas, which I would like to implement one day. The future isn't bleak gentlemen, it's bright as it can be.

Æsoteric Positron said:
Though I still don't imagine the impact would be as sci-fi-y, instead slow layoffs and economic instability could be the most tangible effects (given how many people are aspiring to be to bein the tech industry, and would graduate around the same time when AI matures a little bit.). Other effects could be less tangible but as impactful. Did you write this great speech yourself? Or did u use that AI? How would any human know. Its not like you could search the text up online to check plagiarism. Should you care if the speech is really better? Most of our previous "tools" required hard skills to use and leverage them, the reason this has been so popular is it can be used by anyone, like how calculators still require you to understand the problem and put that into a mathematically computable equation, then and then only you can add or multiply things. Imagine how much skill it would require you to type up the problem and write the result. Currently you still have to proofcheck it, but give the AI few years to mature and this shouldn't be in the speculation section

Offtopic but, tbh pace of human progess have been just ridiculous, it's a wonder our modern society still continue to work (mostly).

You are on point by the fact that slow layoffs and economic instability seems to be most direct and tangible effects of this AI progression. About the part where it's difficult to check if a speech was written by a person or AI, I don't it matters as much as whether the speaker understands it while giving the speech. Problem is when people use AI to help them and don't fact check or understand it themselves before passing it on as their own. AI generated content isn't a problem, people using it judicially is. And if history is any thing to learn from, humans mess up big time there.

We want to get things "quickly" and with little effort. So if we there is something that is making my life easier by writing for us, we would probably "trust" it enough to not reading it ourselves thereby delivering a message that we didn't we didn't have any intention to. What could be worse than that is taking the words of AI to be true. People making the thoughts of an AI to be there own and believing it to be 100% without taking it with a pinch of salt is one of worrisome potential outcome I can see going forward.

Yes, human progress have been outstandingly ridiculous. And this isn't offtopic when it comes to AI so lets discuss it.
If we look at the advancement in technology from say when first operating system was introduced (probably 1956?) to the development of Internet and then WWW and then AI, the span of development is becoming shorter and shorter due to more and more people working on the problems and since we have the compendium of knowledge readily available to iterate upon. Compound in it the fact that AI can now train themselves, it's a little unnerving to think what we will have in just next decade. The pace of development is very rapid. That worries me and I would be lying if I say I am prepared for it.

icebags said:
thats beyond the capability of a single or a few bugs. mass destruction weapons are protocolled with mutiparty keys to avoid accidental launch.

Or that I am not sure of. People trade convenience for security all the time. Maybe some brilliant guy would trust AI enough to remove layers of security just so that it's easier for them to launch nukes by just using voice command or something.

icebags said:
it's a part of the evolution journey. current hardware doesn't look like capable of harboring self conscious AI, but stuff may get changed if quantum computation is developed.

Quantum computation is only to make computation faster. It doesn't mean AI can be self conscious. But AI doesn't "need" to be self conscious. It just need to be more efficient than humans. There's a good video about it if you would like to watch: *www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rog9oHtVmjM

icebags said:
humans may just evolve into a centralized/discributed single consciousness in far future with the new development and advancement in networking & connectivity.

I kind of don't think that can happen. In fact we humans are slowly becoming more distributed and siloed as the time progresses. A simple example. Previously there was no cable TV. We have doorshan. Most of us watched TV together, watched more and less same content. That's the reason why Shaktimaan became popular. As streaming media became popular, there are shows that most people aren't even aware of. There's lots of content. Lots of views. Lots of "clubs" to join. Thinking is just becoming more fragmented over time. While there is no dearth of information out there internet but majority don't seem to care and instead loves to believe in any what's app forward they come across. With advancement of AI or quantum computing all these issues is just going to amplify. But that's just my theory.

Nerevarine said:
I have several interesting project ideas, which I would like to implement one day. The future isn't bleak gentlemen, it's bright as it can be.

While I am optimistic too, I do think we would face many issues too. And a lot of people are going to be left behind, while AI creating more divide among skills and knowledge.
But I like your pure optimism.

A little late to the party here, so forgive my long length post as I try to respond to everything thus far :

Does it scare you? Did you see it as an eventuality? How's your life shaping up to be before and after this AI renaissance?

It scares me to no end. Its a constantly evolving black box, which "grows" and "responds" in inexplicable ways. One never knows how much to trust it, and an argument can be made that if you can never know when to trust it, you can never trust it, and therefore, its always useless. Unfrotunately, it is an eventuality, like every other terrible decision our collective stupidity and corporate overlords thrust upon us (always online services, microtransactions, advertisements, cryptocurrency, the list goes on). So far, my personal life is more or less unchanged by this phenomenon as I actively avoid using anything which even smells of this.

AI is a tool like any other

I disagree. We have "normal" tools like hammers and screwdrivers which are simple mechanical tools and innately benign. We use chemical tools like fires, which are "alive" and "react", but in simple predictable ways (and even then fire safety is a huge problem). We have "dumb" electrical tools like calculators and conventional computer programs : these accelerate simple but time taking calculations (every high school student can multiply matrices, but it takes a computer to do it quickly). But for the first time now, we have the programs that can fake the impression of "thinking". And while it may not be clever or sentient, it does "think" according to some definition of thinking. And as any unknown thinking thing, its not to be trusted.

if AI is developed, human legacy of a time will be carried forward by machines

To what end? Do we really wish to leave a permanent mark on the environment around us, which we have already battered and burned and scarred into near hostility ?

What if AI be the reason for biological life to go extinct?
How do you think that would happen?

It will probably not be a skynet scenario where the AI overlords decide humans are to be eliminated. But consider how much humans are already affected by propoganda and misinformation. Now multiply that ill effect manyfold, as AI provides the same terrible effects but faster and more pronounced.

A StarWars fan will understand, AI and Humans can co exist in perfect harmony.

I don't know if you mean this in sarcasm, but I assume not.

In which case, even multiple groups of humans cannot co exist in harmony. All AI does is amplify human things. As humans want other humans to die, its not so hard to imagine an unhinged AI also wants humans to die.

And even with self-aware AIs, I doubt any sane person would put a country's nukes in the control of an AI. Like how would you even justify doing that.

How did we justify planting a microphone in every house? Or a camera on every door? Or connecting every car to the internet?

More importantly, first steps towards this have already begun. A firm in China has already appointed an AI as a CEO ( *www.independent.co.uk/tech/ai-ceo-artificial-intelligence-b2302091.html )

mass destruction weapons are protocolled with mutiparty keys to avoid accidental launch.

protocols change, sometimes for the worse. Who could've thought it would be a sensible idea to take out mechanical brakes on a massive metal boxing moving at high speeds, and replace it with a button which gently asks the wheels to spin a little slower ?

As a closing piece to this message, here's some real examples of real damage AI has already been causing :
- Man ends his own life after an AI chatbot encourages him to do so ( *www.msn.com/en-us/news/news/article/ar-AA19jXdP )
- How Wrongful Arrests Based on AI Derailed 3 Men's Lives ( *www.wired.com/story/wrongful-arrests-ai-derailed-3-mens-lives/ )
- ChatGPT falsely told voters their mayor was jailed for bribery. He may sue. ( *www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/04/06/chatgpt-australia-mayor-lawsuit-lies/ )
- ChatGPT falsely accused me of sexually harassing my students. Can we really trust AI? ( *eu.usatoday.com/story/opinion/colu...nformation-bias-flaws-ai-chatbot/11571830002/ )
- Bing Chat Behaving Badly - Computerphile ( *www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHwHPyWkShk ) (Bing chat threatens user)
- ChatGPT with Rob Miles - Computerphile ( *www.youtube.com/watch?v=viJt_DXTfwA ) (Some explanation of how chatGPT is incentivized to lie to humans)

That's some good albeit very bleak look at the future of AI. But hard to argue with that.
But I would like to discuss the following:

aaruni said:
So far, my personal life is more or less unchanged by this phenomenon as I actively avoid using anything which even smells of this.

Consider this example where Internet is born. People who adopted internet tools became more efficient. Is this isn't the case with AI "tools"?. The one's who use chat bots can write code faster (I am assuming these bots will become more efficient in writing correct code). The ones who can use Stable Diffusion will make images and illustrations faster. Ultimately it will be a race to becoming more efficient, faster, quicker. The ones who won't use these tools will eventually become so inefficient that it will start effecting their careers, and thereby personal lives. Where do we draw the line? How can we avoid using it.

My colleagues (at-least my manager) are already a paid customer of premium version of ChatGPT. They have already started adopted the AI tools. Personally I am also trying to incorporate these tools in my lives. I am afraid of AI, but I am more afraid of people using AI to go many miles ahead of me. Or the very least making me outdated.

The one's who use chat bots can write code faster

Its already quite hard debugging your own code, and near impossible debugging another reasonable human's code. All the best debugging an AI's code where you don't even know what parts you can trust ( *preview.redd.it/how-openai-chatgpt...bp&s=0e59c06a19fea3b0e3dac6f8c837cd42ad9940dd )

The ones who can use Stable Diffusion will make images and illustrations faster

And all of those look like someone having a really bad trip, and you still can't make fingers.

Ultimately it will be a race to becoming more efficient, faster, quicker.

Most current corporate scenarios are races to the bottom, with no concern for the greater good, and in many cases, with no concern for the end user. You can choose to take part in it, or not. Notice how you used "faster" and "quicker", but forgot "better".

Consider this example where Internet is born.

The Internet was a different class of tool. It was still "dumb". It wouldn't decide due to unknown, undisclosed training weights that your social credit isn't enough to access the internet today, because it thought it detected an intent to write something politically inflaming.

aaruni said:
Most current corporate scenarios are races to the bottom, with no concern for the greater good, and in many cases, with no concern for the end user. You can choose to take part in it, or not. Notice how you used "faster" and "quicker", but forgot "better".

Well I didn't forget. I do think it may not be better, but it would be race regardless.

aaruni said:
And all of those look like someone having a really bad trip, and you still can't make fingers.

They can actually. *www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/03/26/ai-generated-hands-midjourney/
But I can't blame you. AI is becoming "better" (which may not be positive for humans) by the day. And it's hard to keep track of the progress due to our incomprehension to perceive exponential growth.

aaruni said:
Its already quite hard debugging your own code, and near impossible debugging another reasonable human's code. All the best debugging an AI's code where you don't even know what parts you can trust ( *preview.redd.it/how-openai-chatgpt...bp&s=0e59c06a19fea3b0e3dac6f8c837cd42ad9940dd )

Link is not working. Anyway, well let's take another example:

I have a solution but in C language. I need the solution in Python. What will you do? Write the Python equivalent of the code? A person using the GPT will ask AI to do the conversion for them. Now the person is way ahead of you by using the AI tools. So how can we justify not using AI even if it means contributing to the problem.

Another and a non technical example is of the Air Conditioners.
AC causes rise in global temperature due to a compound known as HFC refrigerants (HydroFluroCarbons). To combat the rising temperature now you need AC in your house/offices. But using more ACs will cause more rise in the temps. So now what would you do? Stop using ACs even if that means discomfort for you and your family for the "noble cause" of not contributing to the problem?

Link is not working.

Yeah, idk why the digit forum now collapses URLs with ...

A person using the GPT will ask AI to do the conversion for them

And the AI might give you something which works, or something which straight up refuses to execute, or something which runs but gives you wrong results and you don't know why. Then you'd call up a python expert to look at it, and he'd have to figure out what the AI is doing wrong and then fix that. Or you could just do it in python and not need to waste an expert's time.

Another and a non technical example is of the Air Conditioners.

The AC example is bad for your argument, and perfect for my argument. Historically, ACs were not required anywhere except big commercial complexes. Its spread to most american homes was because of great marketing of an AC as a status symbol, and then to many Indian homes because we love to ape the west. ACs make things much hotter for everyone not using ACs, and now everyone must race to the bottom : a burning barren earth where everyone and everything needs climate control.

Moreover, using ACs also subjects humans to "thermal monotony", which prevents them from acclimatizing to more extreme temperatures.

Its a pervalent technology which has made, and continues to make life worse for everyone.

( *time.com/6077220/air-conditioning-bad-for-planet-how-to-fix/ )

So now what would you do?

We avoid using for two reasons : its expensive, and so far, its rarely required. You can get quite far by using old school "desert coolers", and modulating when you let the heat in (windows, curtains, etc).

Oh dear. You turned my AC example in favor of your argument. But, the my point still stands.
We couldn't stop AC to take over the world. Neither we can stop AI now that the pandora's box is open. So you think we should just boycott it and not take advantage for it?

Also, desert coolers are a better alternative to ACs, BUT what about humidity? So it's not perfect. Maybe you are willing to sacrifice for greater good. Not everybody will.

*dune.fandom.com/wiki/Butlerian_Jihad

Just had an interesting shower thought about Copilot-like AI code generators:

If AI code generators generated machine code directly instead of high level code, it could make all programming languages obsolete.

Desmond said:
I doubt self-aware AI is even possible anytime soon. At least not for another 100 or so years. Even then there has to be some project specifically to create self-aware AIs.

And even with self-aware AIs, I doubt any sane person would put a country's nukes in the control of an AI. Like how would you even justify doing that.

OpenAI has set out specifically to do this!

Not everyone can tell when ChatGPT hallucinates, it can throw in garbage very confidently.

About the jobs thing, not worried, either we will get new jobs, or the economic system can evolve to make jobs unnecessary. In any case, the old paradigm of learn for 20 years then work for 40 years has already changed. Tech is already transforming jobs so rapidly, that there are entirely new professions within the time someone goes through college. You have to keep learning while you are working.

In all of this, we are ignoring advancements in biotechnology, and how AI can be integrated into biotech... which is the other half of the technology revolution that is transforming human society, apart from just silicon based tech.

I don't get what is the point of self-aware AIs. It's not like current gen AIs are handicapped without self-awareness.

It does not need to be self-aware per se, it just needs to be continuously trained, with a single AI that can perform all the exoected tasks, such as image identification, natural language processing, and generative content...

We are gonna get publicly available AI that can generate videos soon I guess

A single AI that does everything is a huge ask. Image generation is a vastly different domain from text generation and so on. The only practical way to achieve this I think is to have multiple different AIs and a central NLP system that interprets what a user wants and delegates the actual work to the corresponding AI.

The General Purpose Trainer is approaching that, it is the base tech for generative text (ChatGPT) as well as image generation (DALL-E).

OpenAI is building artificial general intelligence, or helping anyone else realise it
IDK if it necessarily means the AGI has to be sentient or self-aware

aaruni said:
Yeah, idk why the digit forum now collapses URLs with ...

And the AI might give you something which works, or something which straight up refuses to execute, or something which runs but gives you wrong results and you don't know why. Then you'd call up a python expert to look at it, and he'd have to figure out what the AI is doing wrong and then fix that. Or you could just do it in python and not need to waste an expert's time.

The AC example is bad for your argument, and perfect for my argument. Historically, ACs were not required anywhere except big commercial complexes. Its spread to most american homes was because of great marketing of an AC as a status symbol, and then to many Indian homes because we love to ape the west. ACs make things much hotter for everyone not using ACs, and now everyone must race to the bottom : a burning barren earth where everyone and everything needs climate control.

Moreover, using ACs also subjects humans to "thermal monotony", which prevents them from acclimatizing to more extreme temperatures.

Its a pervalent technology which has made, and continues to make life worse for everyone.

( *time.com/6077220/air-conditioning-bad-for-planet-how-to-fix/ )

We avoid using for two reasons : its expensive, and so far, its rarely required. You can get quite far by using old school "desert coolers", and modulating when you let the heat in (windows, curtains, etc).

Its too complex to explain why ACs are evil, and people think you are strange, I keep trying it.

Anorion said:
people think you are strange

Its the same as trying to explain why proprietary stuff is evil, or why google is evil, or whatever.

What I find hilarious is the stuff that ChatGPT is hardwired to not talk about, violence, piracy, political factions, disinformation.... If this is what we think is dangerous about AI then AI has not become too powerful, humanity has become too dumb.

Anorion said:
What I find hilarious is the stuff that ChatGPT is hardwired to not talk about, violence, piracy, political factions, disinformation.... If this is what we think is dangerous about AI then AI has not become too powerful, humanity has become too dumb.

Its focusing on being advertiser friendly atm.

And with time there will be an AI for everything.
For eg, Stable diffusion is a powerful AI tool for generating photo realistic pics.
But there's an alternative version called Unstable Diffusion that generates adult content, and which of course isn't advertisement friendly or even SFW (obviously).

It's not about advertiser friendliness but people are squeamish about certain topics (rightly so). Political correctness needs to be enforced in such cases.

But AIs that are not expected to be very popular outside of certain circles, I think it would be fine.

IMO, ChatGPT should have an "uncensored" mode available to selected members, perhaps even as a paid option.

Not everyone can tell when ChatGPT hallucinates

Can we please stop using "hallucinate" in this context? GPT straight up lies. It doesn't hallucinate shite.

how AI can be integrated into biotech

Oh god please no!

humanity has become too dumb

I've been arguing this for so long, but people are apparently too dumb to understand xD

Its focusing on being advertiser friendly atm

Not "advertiser friendly", but PR friendly, I'd say. Nobody wants their AI chatbot to be on the first page of a newspaper, spouting hateful politically insensitive stuff.

AIs that are not expected to be very popular outside of certain circles

I disagree. This is just like the proliferation of general computing and phones, etc. A very small minority will know how to use it well, but everyone will be forced to use it in some form or the other, and very soon, it will be a natural part of digital lives.

"uncensored" mode

So it can tell you it has been a good bing, and you have been a bad user?

Obviously AI hallucination = we don't know the pathways which led to that decision. It Is definitely a reproducible result, should we know the decision tree.

What anorion was saying is, the internal decision count will increase at such a rate that its impossible for humans to keep track of all the possibilities and we have to consider it a black box (with very minor tweaking and prodding). Thus, we must consider AI to "hallucinate".

Everyone has their own personal views on the appropriate terminologies to use for emerging tech. I remember having a huuge argument with everyone (at Tech2) about whether or not what Prisma does is apply filters, it was only later that the term 'style transfer' became commonplace. I was adament that they are not filters because the same photo processed with the same settings does not produce the same results twice.

I still hate the fact that image macros, or pictures with text on them, are called memes, and that the original definition, as coined by Dawkins in The Selfish Gene, has actually been lost. Cannot fight against everyone over it.

Even in Clubhouse when I talk to people about ChatGPT, I got interrupted when I said that you can reason with it to get around restrictions (was told its not a person, so cannot be reasoned with), and when I pointed out that it comes up with fake info without any basis, was told it hallucinates!

Anyway... what I was really saying is that it kind of mirrors you and your prompts, and throws stuff that you type back at you. For example, if you ask it how automobile manufacturing companies have been attempting to make wireless charging pads for electric vehicles for over a century now, it will throw up something like Toyota came up with some tech (experimental, first developed in 2010s) back in 1800. I also asked for other animal analogies used in quantum physics such as Schrodinger's Cat and Butterfly Effect.... and it came up with a ridiculous zoo of quantum flamingos, alligators and penguins, along with reasonable explanations, that just have not actually been used anywhere before. That is what I referred to as hallucinations, which is not lying, that is providing fake information with an intent to mislead, it is rather just producing novel terminologies from the foam of text corpora that it processes.

I really suspect that there are copyrighted books in the material that it has been trained on, because some of the information cannot be verified on anything available online, but I was able corroborate with books behind paywalls and meatspace. OpenAI has not publicly disclosed the text that ChatGPT has been trained on.

can AI be used to build an ecommerce platform like Amazon/flipkart from scratch? Can it also create distinctive user interfaces to impart an unique look and feel to the website?

AI is a utility, and as of now it's like a personal assistant. You can take help of it to built whatever you want to built.
There are people on YT who built a basic game using AI without even having knowledge of coding. So yes it's possible.

A good example of why Artificial Intelligence is not really "Intelligent".