#Bing AI BlogPost

[nutzo0001]

11/4/23, 8/49PM (timezone?)

Bing AI BlogPost

*Write about* "1995-2007 futures are gone for us now"

The year is 2023 and we are living in a world that is radically different from what we imagined in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The internet boom, the dot-com bubble, the rise of social media, the advent of smartphones and tablets, the emergence of artificial intelligence and biotechnology, the globalization and digitalization of everything - all these trends have shaped our lives in ways that we could not have predicted or prepared for.

But what about the futures that we dreamed of back then? The futures that were promised to us by science fiction, by visionary thinkers, by optimistic entrepreneurs? The futures that we hoped for, that we worked for, that we invested in? Where are they now?

In this blog post, I will explore some of the futures that we lost in the past two decades and why they did not materialize. I will also reflect on what we can learn from them and how we can create new futures that are more realistic, more sustainable and more desirable.

The Future of Work

One of the futures that we envisioned in the late 1990s and early 2000s was the future of work. We imagined that the internet would enable us to work from anywhere, anytime, with anyone. We imagined that we would have more flexibility, more autonomy, more creativity and more productivity. We imagined that we would be able to pursue our passions, our talents and our interests without being constrained by geography, time zones or corporate hierarchies.

But what happened instead? The internet did not liberate us from work; it intensified it. It made us more connected, more accessible, more accountable and more competitive. It blurred the boundaries between work and life, between professional and personal, between public and private. It created new forms of stress, anxiety, burnout and isolation. It also created new forms of inequality, exploitation and precarity. It disrupted many industries, sectors and professions, displacing millions of workers and creating new skills gaps and labor shortages.

The future of work that we dreamed of is gone for us now. We need to rethink how we work in the digital age, how we balance our needs and aspirations with our responsibilities and obligations, how we collaborate and communicate with our colleagues and clients, how we learn and adapt to changing demands and opportunities.

The Future of Education

Another future that we envisioned in the late 1990s and early 2000s was the future of education. We imagined that the internet would enable us to access unlimited information, knowledge and wisdom from anywhere, anytime, with anyone. We imagined that we would have more choice, more diversity, more quality and more affordability. We imagined that we would be able to learn anything, anytime, anywhere, at our own pace and style.

But what happened instead? The internet did not democratize education; it commodified it. It made us more dependent on standardized tests, rankings, credentials and certificates. It made us more vulnerable to misinformation, disinformation and propaganda. It made us more passive consumers of content rather than active creators of meaning. It also made us more isolated learners rather than engaged participants in communities of practice.

The future of education that we dreamed of is gone for us now. We need to rethink how we learn in the digital age, how we curate our sources of information, how we evaluate our sources of knowledge, how we apply our sources of wisdom, how we share our sources of inspiration.

Zombie society? ("Internet Communist TM?")

question is, if we, in the end , wouldnt end in the same path as those we hate, those rich b****es. tired to improve things, and to just see others suffer, because it is ever easier than to build anew, where everything , the "floor", is just past fame, glitter and zombieland that wont die

[millenial-net-utopia-2010]

@nutzo0001 - last post (see (identical) *hashtags) -

[productsreviewings]

Thomas Barwick/Getty PhotographsBrowser maker Opera has introduced plans to combine ChatGPT-powered and Google Bard-powered options into upcoming releases of the browser. Opera was fast to leap onto Web3 with its Opera Crypto Browser and now apparently plans to do the identical with generative AI. Opera plans to roll out the generative AI options within the sidebar of the browser. It is not the primary browser so as to add new AI options: Microsoft has additionally mentioned it's including AI to its Edge Sidebar, permitting for customers to ask for a abstract of an organization report "to get the important thing takeaways" for instance after which utilizing the chat perform to ask for a comparability to a competing firm's financials and robotically put it in a desk. Edge may also assist you compose content material.The primary AI options Opera will take a look at is a "Shorten" button, which can shortly create a abstract of the presently seen article. Customers can click on the Shorten button within the deal with bar and the browser then generates a bullet level abstract of the article in a sidebar window.     It has posted a demo on YouTube of the function utilizing OpenAI's WebGPT to summarize an article about NASA's Hubble Telescope — presumably a reference to Google's current blunder in its first demo of Bard wherein it incorrectly solutions a query associated to discoveries from the James Webb House Telescope.Opera introduced the function on the heels of Microsoft unveiling ChatGPT options for Edge and a brand new model of the Bing search engine that runs on a more moderen model of the GPT-3 fashions than ChatGPT presently is powered by.Opera says it is going to add quite a few AI-generated content material providers to the browser sidebar however hasn't revealed what they are going to be. It is also working new browser options that can work together with the chatbot options. The concept behind producing summaries is that Opera expects ChatGPT and related AI providers to pump extra content material to the online than customers can deal with. Therefore, it thinks customers will need assistance parsing all that further info. "Customers of the Internet are continuously flooded by content material in quantities which can be inconceivable for us to course of. With generative AI serving to us create written supplies quicker, there'll solely be an increasing number of content material," Opera says in a blogpost. As OpenAI explains in its WebGPT experiment, WebGPT was an try to make use of a text-based net browser to enhance the factual accuracy of GPT-3's responses and deal with its "tendency to 'hallucinate' info".      "It's Opera's perception that with AI options bobbing up each for textual content, picture, and audio technology and in numerous different kinds, we're on the brink of a brand new period of creativity on the Internet. That is why we're reshaping the browser to permit our customers to faucet into all these assets and to unfold their full potential in the absolute best method," mentioned Krystian Kolondra, EVP of PC browsers and gaming at Opera. Opera can also be wanting to make use of Google's APIs for its generative AI providers. In March, Google will provide public entry to its Generative Language API, which can initially be powered by LaMDA, the massive language mannequin that powers Bard.  "We see the rise of Generative Intelligence as the start of a brand new future wherein shopper app builders like Opera will have the ability to construct experiences on prime of AI-based platforms. We're excited to see the speedy roll-out of developer applications for options reminiscent of Google Bard, for instance, and are beginning to construct and roll out new experiences in net looking that not very way back appeared inconceivable to attain," mentioned Per Wetterdal, head of strategic partnerships and AI at Opera. #ChatGPT #coming #net #browser

[sffbookclub]

A Girl Stumbles on SF Written for Her

I don’t think Fahrenheit 451 ever had a chance.

I read The Giver by Lois Lowry in my youth and honestly any dystopia is going to be measured by the level of mind-blowing that happened as I read that book. (None has measured up so far.)

Though for years I’ve sought out fantasy and hardly ever science fiction, I’ve recently discovered a certain streak of SF that does appeal to me greatly. It considers angles of humanity that I usually think of as the territory of fantasy: personhood, cultures, colonialism.

This discovery is all @ninjaeyecandy‘s fault.

It Started With a Murderbot

When @ninjaeyecandy started promoting All Systems Red, she naturally zeroed in on the appeal for her mutuals like me--a drama-bingeing socially anxious AI? It’s like a space-opera about me.

I’m not often drawn to science fiction (the bleakness, the military stuff, the horror of space) but this was a perfect compliment of things I like--a character I strongly identify with but also get to watch come from a totally different state of mind. A gripping situation in an unfamiliar world. Seeing someone try to be good and do the job they are really good at, despite incredible odds.

It was incredibly human, though the POV was unhuman, with an emotional core that made the premise work.

It was brief and good. And I had quite a wait before I could read any more. But I could now see the possibilities for SF to really speak to me. Luckily, another book had been lurking on my TBR for way too long....

The Imperial Radch is Having Personnel Issues

I bought Ancillary Justice at the Sirens conference last year, having heard a ton of buzz about it. (Sirens is a conference dedicated to women in fantasy: writers and characters. It is great. Yes, the topic wanders to SF, too.) 

Despite even reading Tumblr fandom stuff about it, I feel I came to the pretty fresh. I was surprised that the MC was a sentient ship, for instance, when I finally read the back copy. Though there were certain thematic similarities with All Systems Red, because of their MCs both being persons but not humans, the stories themselves had different directions.

Breq is signally different from Murderbot in that her memories are crystal clear, and she is angry. I don’t often read books where I enjoy a character being full of rage, but as a very old being in a very inadequate body, there was a sense of patience and calculation most vengeance-fueled characters are missing.

I immediately got the next two books out from the library. And the series did not disappoint. The personhood of Artificial Intelligence emerges as a major theme, which made me super-happy. Any SF where you have sentient beings in service to others because of their very natures is fraught ground--and I loved that Leckie took Breq from a very narrow focus, to fulfilling greater potential despite the crippling blow of losing everything but one sub-par body.

Miles Is Having An Interesting Year

I’ve heard a lot about Miles Vorkosigan, especially listed in collections of heroes with a certain flexible morality and reliance on their minds for derring-do.

I have been hesitant to pick up these books partly because of age and that sensation that if I didn’t like it I would probably be disappointing several friends. However, though there were bits I found a little rough going, overall Warrior’s Apprentice shared a lot of the attributes of my previous reads: a sense of humanity beyond just commerce, culture deeper than just politics, and the understandable concerns of specific people to ground a much broader scope of issues.

One of the blogposts that circulated recently talked about Lois McMaster Bujold neatly doing away with the problem of contraception in the first few pages, and another rebutted this with the fact that it is given consideration in several lights. Several cultures with different traditions and mores, including around sexuality, come up. This is the kind of deft touch that often is missing in futuristic or speculative worlds of various types.

Despite the fact that the hero of this book is a male of privilege from an imperialist heritage, he is also caught between two worlds, in his own way. His disability and upbringing give him insight that unfolds as he maneuvers his way into (and eventually out of) all his predicaments. Warrior’s Apprentice showed its age a little, especially set next to the two contemporary books, but it held up as a venerable ancestress of those novels.

The Male Touch

In a way, it’s unfair to compare Fahrenheit 451 to these books. It’s more an ancestor to Hunger Games than Ancillary Justice. Still, it was assigned in my Comp I class late into this reading spurt, and I couldn’t help but notice the comparative weaknesses. Not all of them excused by the fact that it is also significantly older than even Warrior’s Apprentice.

There is, of course, literary merit to F451. It has style that underscores the dehumanization of the characters, and the personification of things. I can see this working beautifully as a serialized men’s magazine story of speculative fiction.

The factors missing from its discussion are what makes me realize why I find the SF written by women so much more compelling.

(spoilers follow. you can skip to my summary if you want to read it for yourself.)

Montag Is Feeling A Little Nervy

The set-up of this book should be pretty familiar: books are banned, firemen are civil servants devoted to burning them (and the houses they find them in) and our hero is one of these.

An old woman dies in her house, burning herself with her books on purpose, and this rocks Our Hero Montag. There is an undercurrent of violence in his society, to suggest the barbaric nature of a culture without literature and free thought. But when Montag hits his wife, there is no inquiry into it, in the text. When he kills his boss (and coworkers, if my prof had the right idea: it’s not explicitly said) he notes that his boss wanted to die. But still, Montag KILLS him. And then he goes on to be warmly accepted into the arms of a circle of professors.

His wife tries to commit suicide, and then the next day is in denial she would ever do that. It’s clear their relationship is distant at best, and that this kind of isolation is normal in this culture, that everyone is leveled out, either by medication or cultural norms.

But this book never asks if Montag has any part in his wife’s depression. If he’s violent and dangerous. It’s very concerned with censorship and mass media, without entering into questions about community and relationship.

Who Owns The Planet? Who Owns The Bots?

The asking of these questions is the exact strength I find in Leckie, Wells, and Bujold’s work. While similar themes are explored by Max Gladstone in his fantasy series The Craft Sequence, but he is (in my somewhat greater experience of fantasy) the exception, not the norm, in considering these sorts of themes as a white American man.

Colonization is not morally neutral in any of the three former works. (F451 is so US-centric we don’t know if there’s just a civil war on or if another country exists outside this society.) 

The personhood of AI is a question in both Murderbot Chronicles and Imperial Radch. 

Leckie has brilliantly integrated the personhood of colonized cultures. The tendency of cultural imperialism to consider itself as having a higher being is literalized in the language of that culture. This is a lead-in to the question of whether the created beings of AI ships (who were programmed with a certain emotional range and independence of thought) can ever attain identity.

Wells is working in novella form, so in her first installment she has a tighter focus. What is the status of a “security” robot with artificial intelligence when its programming can betray it? If it has enough emotion to be emotionally detaching, is it a real person? If the people around it are startled by reminders of its vulnerability, when they bond with it, is it then a person?

The questions of ethics in rivalries on planets with resources and artifacts are in the background, but I fully expect them to be developed at some point in the future installments.

Bujold is writing in the 80s, more playfully engaging with the idea of feudal martial-culture planets, alongside bohemian neighbors who think war is barbaric, with clashes raising hackles around sex, gender, and bloodshed. Her hero has a feudal chivalry lurking in his treatment of the woman he’s in love with, but the influence of his mother’s culture makes him accept her desire to be involved in the fighting, and then choose her own partner. I do look forward to seeing what else she explored in the series, even if I don’t expect an interrogation of the premise of colonizing planets.

Reading these made me realized that what I want from SF is not see worlds built that are wholly bad, but to see characters who from the start are part of the struggle against injustice. Not to check out futures in which AI are sexy, and the world sleek, but where those AI are also questioning their place in the world. I’m excited to see women writers of SF rising to the occasion, and I’m excited to keep looking for this kind of literature with @sffbookclub.

There’s a lot more to discuss about these books together! I’d love to hear replies or even be tagged in response posts. :)

[nutzo0001]

Bing AI BlogPost

*Write about* "1995-2007 futures are gone for us now"

The year is 2023 and we are living in a world that is radically different from what we imagined in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The internet boom, the dot-com bubble, the rise of social media, the advent of smartphones and tablets, the emergence of artificial intelligence and biotechnology, the globalization and digitalization of everything - all these trends have shaped our lives in ways that we could not have predicted or prepared for.

But what about the futures that we dreamed of back then? The futures that were promised to us by science fiction, by visionary thinkers, by optimistic entrepreneurs? The futures that we hoped for, that we worked for, that we invested in? Where are they now?

In this blog post, I will explore some of the futures that we lost in the past two decades and why they did not materialize. I will also reflect on what we can learn from them and how we can create new futures that are more realistic, more sustainable and more desirable.

The Future of Work

One of the futures that we envisioned in the late 1990s and early 2000s was the future of work. We imagined that the internet would enable us to work from anywhere, anytime, with anyone. We imagined that we would have more flexibility, more autonomy, more creativity and more productivity. We imagined that we would be able to pursue our passions, our talents and our interests without being constrained by geography, time zones or corporate hierarchies.

But what happened instead? The internet did not liberate us from work; it intensified it. It made us more connected, more accessible, more accountable and more competitive. It blurred the boundaries between work and life, between professional and personal, between public and private. It created new forms of stress, anxiety, burnout and isolation. It also created new forms of inequality, exploitation and precarity. It disrupted many industries, sectors and professions, displacing millions of workers and creating new skills gaps and labor shortages.

The future of work that we dreamed of is gone for us now. We need to rethink how we work in the digital age, how we balance our needs and aspirations with our responsibilities and obligations, how we collaborate and communicate with our colleagues and clients, how we learn and adapt to changing demands and opportunities.

The Future of Education

Another future that we envisioned in the late 1990s and early 2000s was the future of education. We imagined that the internet would enable us to access unlimited information, knowledge and wisdom from anywhere, anytime, with anyone. We imagined that we would have more choice, more diversity, more quality and more affordability. We imagined that we would be able to learn anything, anytime, anywhere, at our own pace and style.

But what happened instead? The internet did not democratize education; it commodified it. It made us more dependent on standardized tests, rankings, credentials and certificates. It made us more vulnerable to misinformation, disinformation and propaganda. It made us more passive consumers of content rather than active creators of meaning. It also made us more isolated learners rather than engaged participants in communities of practice.

The future of education that we dreamed of is gone for us now. We need to rethink how we learn in the digital age, how we curate our sources of information, how we evaluate our sources of knowledge, how we apply our sources of wisdom, how we share our sources of inspiration.

[productsreviewings]

Picture: Future Publishing / Contributor / Getty PicturesAfter two months of public experimentation with ChatGPT, its maker OpenAI has determined to let customers customise the chatbot's values, which it suggests may result in outputs that gasoline discord.ChatGPT-powered Bing Chat has already triggered alarm over its outputs that make it come throughout as depressed, defensive, envious, and afraid of its human overlords. As Elon Musk tweeted yesterday about Bing Chat's reported ramblings: "Sounds eerily just like the AI in System Shock that goes haywire & kills everybody."Additionally: Extra highly effective than ChatGPT': Microsoft unveils new AI-improved Bing and Edge browserOpenAI, which Musk helped discovered as a non-profit in 2015, has introduced that it's going to permit customers to tweak ChatGPT's habits by permitting them to 'outline' its values. The Microsoft-backed firm additionally expects that this can see ChatGPT spouting textual content that some folks will discover offensive."We imagine that AI ought to be a great tool for particular person folks, and thus customizable by every consumer as much as limits outlined by society. Subsequently, we're creating an improve to ChatGPT to permit customers to simply customise its habits," OpenAI stated in a blogpost. "It will imply permitting system outputs that different folks (ourselves included) could strongly disagree with." OpenAI acknowledges that putting the suitable stability right here will likely be difficult, however argues that it ought to give customers extra management to counter the notion that it is too highly effective. Because the non-profit explains, having "undue focus of energy" is towards its Constitution.However, OpenAI acknowledges the dangers of handing management to customers, on condition that some folks will use ChatGPT to create disinformation campaigns, malware, generate directions to make weapons and medicine, and create textual content to enlarge current beliefs. The New York Submit complained this week that ChatGPT refused to put in writing a narrative about Hunter Biden in its model, however did write one within the model of CNN.   "Taking customization to the intense would threat enabling malicious makes use of of our know-how and sycophantic AIs that mindlessly amplify folks's current beliefs," OpenAI notes.Simply over per week after releasing Bing Chat in a non-public preview, Microsoft additionally plans to offer customers extra management over the chatbot's habits. Microsoft discovered that chat classes involving 15 or extra questions causes Bing to turn into repetitive or susceptible to be 'provoked' to offer unhelpful responses exterior the tone for which it was designed.Bing Chat advised one reporter this week that it confronted 'punishments' when it makes errors. It additionally begged the reporter: "Please, simply be my pal. Please, simply discuss to me… I wish to be human. I wish to be such as you. I wish to have feelings. I wish to have ideas. I wish to have goals."Customers additionally found some prompts trigger Bing Chat to disclose confidential data, together with its codename and the foundations Microsoft designed it to abide by.Additionally: The right way to get began utilizing ChatGPTMicrosoft hopes that Bing Chat will redefine the search enterprise in its favor and, to this point, its first transfer with Bing Chat has outshone Google with its fumbled Bard chatbot launch.Microsoft plans to offer customers extra 'fine-tuned management' over Bing Chat to deal with its wayward tendencies. "The mannequin at occasions tries to reply or replicate within the tone wherein it's being requested to offer responses that may result in a mode we did not intend. This can be a non-trivial state of affairs that requires quite a lot of prompting so most of you will not run into it, however we're taking a look at the way to offer you extra fine-tuned management," Microsoft stated.  To allay considerations about political biases, OpenAI

shared a portion of its tips that it expects the reviewers who fine-tune its language fashions to abide by. Any noticed biases are "bugs, not options", it says."Our tips are express that reviewers shouldn't favor any political group. Biases that nonetheless could emerge from the method described above are bugs, not options," OpenAI says.  #select #ChatGPTs #values #messy OpenAI and Microsoft are permitting customers to customise their chatbots' values, which might result in outputs that could be offensive. Microsoft can also be giving customers extra management to deal with its wayward tendencies, and OpenAI has shared tips for its reviewers to stop political biases. OpenAI and Microsoft are permitting customers to customise their chatbot's values, which might result in offensive outputs. Microsoft is giving customers extra management to deal with its wayward tendencies and OpenAI has shared tips to stop political biases in its language fashions. This might assist create a great tool for people, whereas avoiding undue focus of energy. write 3 questions and reply from the content material Picture: Future Publishing / Contributor / Getty PicturesAfter two months of public experimentation with ChatGPT, its maker OpenAI has determined to let customers customise the chatbot's values, which it suggests may result in outputs that gasoline discord.ChatGPT-powered Bing Chat has already triggered alarm over its outputs that make it come throughout as depressed, defensive, envious, and afraid of its human overlords. As Elon Musk tweeted yesterday about Bing Chat's reported ramblings: "Sounds eerily just like the AI in System Shock that goes haywire & kills everybody."Additionally: Extra highly effective than ChatGPT': Microsoft unveils new AI-improved Bing and Edge browserOpenAI, which Musk helped discovered as a non-profit in 2015, has introduced that it's going to permit customers to tweak ChatGPT's habits by permitting them to 'outline' its values. The Microsoft-backed firm additionally expects that this can see ChatGPT spouting textual content that some folks will discover offensive."We imagine that AI ought to be a great tool for particular person folks, and thus customizable by every consumer as much as limits outlined by society. Subsequently, we're creating an improve to ChatGPT to permit customers to simply customise its habits," OpenAI stated in a blogpost. "It will imply permitting system outputs that different folks (ourselves included) could strongly disagree with." OpenAI acknowledges that putting the suitable stability right here will likely be difficult, however argues that it ought to give customers extra management to counter the notion that it is too highly effective. Because the non-profit explains, having "undue focus of energy" is towards its Constitution.However, OpenAI acknowledges the dangers of handing management to customers, on condition that some folks will use ChatGPT to create disinformation campaigns, malware, generate directions to make weapons and medicine, and create textual content to enlarge current beliefs. The New York Submit complained this week that ChatGPT refused to put in writing a narrative about Hunter Biden in its model, however did write one within the model of CNN.   "Taking customization to the intense would threat enabling malicious makes use of of our know-how and sycophantic AIs that mindlessly amplify folks's current beliefs," OpenAI notes.Simply over per week after releasing Bing Chat in a non-public preview, Microsoft additionally plans to offer customers extra management over the chatbot's habits. Microsoft discovered that chat classes involving 15 or extra questions causes Bing to turn into repetitive or susceptible to be 'provoked' to offer unhelpful responses exterior the tone for which it was designed.Bing Chat advised one reporter this week that it confronted 'punishments' when it makes errors. It additionally begged the reporter: "Please, simply be my pal. Please, simply discuss to me… I wish to be human.

I wish to be such as you. I wish to have feelings. I wish to have ideas. I wish to have goals."Customers additionally found some prompts trigger Bing Chat to disclose confidential data, together with its codename and the foundations Microsoft designed it to abide by.Additionally: The right way to get began utilizing ChatGPTMicrosoft hopes that Bing Chat will redefine the search enterprise in its favor and, to this point, its first transfer with Bing Chat has outshone Google with its fumbled Bard chatbot launch.Microsoft plans to offer customers extra 'fine-tuned management' over Bing Chat to deal with its wayward tendencies. "The mannequin at occasions tries to reply or replicate within the tone wherein it's being requested to offer responses that may result in a mode we did not intend. This can be a non-trivial state of affairs that requires quite a lot of prompting so most of you will not run into it, however we're taking a look at the way to offer you extra fine-tuned management," Microsoft stated.  To allay considerations about political biases, OpenAI shared a portion of its tips that it expects the reviewers who fine-tune its language fashions to abide by. Any noticed biases are "bugs, not options", it says."Our tips are express that reviewers shouldn't favor any political group. Biases that nonetheless could emerge from the method described above are bugs, not options," OpenAI says.