Postmodernism and moral relativism?

[Jarhyn]

So, this whole fucking thread is more YouTube bullshit.

Also more AI bullshit, it's sad people are now relying on AI so much to "think" for them.

“As the photographic industry was the refuge of every would-be painter, every painter too ill-endowed or too lazy to complete his studies, this universal infatuation bore not only the mark of a blindness, an imbecility, but had also the air of a vengeance. I do not believe, or at least I do not wish to believe, in the absolute success of such a brutish conspiracy, in which, as in all others, one finds both fools and knaves; but I am convinced that the ill-applied developments of photography, like all other purely material developments of progress, have contributed much to the impoverishment of the French artistic genius, which is already so scarce.”

— Charles Baudelaire, [*The Salon of 1859*](https://www.csus.edu/indiv/o/obriene/art109/readings/11%20baudelaire%20photography.htm#:~:text=And%20now%20the%20faithful%20says,on%20a%20scrap%20of%20metal)

This was already on my clipboard.

People can use AI to avoid thinking, or they can use AI to improve it. It's in the specific use, not on the phenomena of the tool.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

So, this whole fucking thread is more YouTube bullshit.

Also more AI bullshit, it's sad people are now relying on AI so much to "think" for them.

“As the photographic industry was the refuge of every would-be painter, every painter too ill-endowed or too lazy to complete his studies, this universal infatuation bore not only the mark of a blindness, an imbecility, but had also the air of a vengeance. I do not believe, or at least I do not wish to believe, in the absolute success of such a brutish conspiracy, in which, as in all others, one finds both fools and knaves; but I am convinced that the ill-applied developments of photography, like all other purely material developments of progress, have contributed much to the impoverishment of the French artistic genius, which is already so scarce.”

— Charles Baudelaire, [*The Salon of 1859*](https://www.csus.edu/indiv/o/obriene/art109/readings/11%20baudelaire%20photography.htm#:~:text=And%20now%20the%20faithful%20says,on%20a%20scrap%20of%20metal)

This was already on my clipboard.

People can use AI to avoid thinking, or they can use AI to improve it. It's in the specific use, not on the phenomena of the tool.

Yes but I'm fairly pessimistic about people so, I don't think many of them are using it to improve thinking. Probably more likely they just want to be flattered.

 

[excreationist]

So, this whole fucking thread is more YouTube bullshit.

Also more AI bullshit, it's sad people are now relying on AI so much to "think" for them.

I thought I'd look into that:

Why is it bad for AI to think for people
AI can be a powerful tool for assisting with thinking, but it's not a replacement for human judgment, creativity, and ethical reasoning. When AI "thinks" for people without their oversight, it can lead to several concerns:
- Loss of Critical Thinking – If people overly rely on AI, they might stop questioning, analyzing, and making independent decisions.
- Bias & Errors – AI systems can reflect biases present in their training data, leading to inaccurate or unfair outcomes.
- Ethical Concerns – AI lacks human morals and values, so decisions made purely by AI may not align with ethical principles.
- Manipulation & Control – Without safeguards, AI could be used to manipulate opinions, mislead people, or make decisions that benefit certain groups unfairly.
- Creativity & Innovation – AI generates ideas based on existing patterns, but true breakthroughs come from human intuition and imagination.
AI is meant to support people, not replace their ability to think critically, make choices, and question information. The best use of AI is as an assistant that enhances human intelligence rather than replacing it.
What do you think? Should AI always leave decision-making to humans, or is there a balance to be found?

I think within a couple of seconds it gave a better answer than me or most other people could give...
Also:

Give references to back up those claims

The 15 Biggest Risks Of Artificial Intelligence

There's a dark side to AI. Learn about the potential negative consequences of this transformative technology and how we can help ensure a safer and more balanced future.

www.forbes.com

The hidden risk of letting AI decide – losing the skills to choose for ourselves

AI has the potential to diminish the human experience in several ways. One particularly concerning threat is to the ability to make thoughtful decisions.

theconversation.com

AI’s cognitive implications: the decline of our thinking skills?

AI's growing reliance may enhance efficiency but risks eroding critical thinking skills if not used mindfully.

www.ie.edu

 

[GenesisNemesis]

So, this whole fucking thread is more YouTube bullshit.

Also more AI bullshit, it's sad people are now relying on AI so much to "think" for them.

I thought I'd look into that:

Here's the thing, though. You didn't. The AI did the work for you. Also why shouldn't we just be talking to an AI if you're just going to use AI for everytihng?

 

[excreationist]

Here's the thing, though. You didn't. The AI did the work for you. Also why shouldn't we just be talking to an AI if you're just going to use AI for everytihng?

I think it's like there a boss and an advisor or consultant. The leader of a country is basically in change but they can commission reports, etc, to do research into things - including very technical subjects. Though if I got AI to write my reply it would probably be a lot better. Well here it is:

why shouldn't we just be talking to an AI if you're just going to use AI for everytihng?

AI is a powerful tool, but it works best as a complement to human interaction rather than a replacement. While AI can provide quick answers, analyze data, and assist with problem-solving, it doesn’t offer the depth of emotional connection, creativity, and ethical reasoning that human conversation brings.Some reasons why talking only to AI might not be ideal:
- Lack of Emotional Depth – AI can recognize sentiment and tone, but it doesn’t truly feel emotions, making it less capable of deep, empathetic discussions.
- Human Judgment Matters – AI can give suggestions based on patterns, but humans bring intuition, context, and ethical reasoning to decisions.
- Serendipity & Creativity – Conversations with people lead to unexpected insights, creativity, and unique experiences that AI can't replicate.
- Social Connection – Humans thrive on meaningful interactions, shared experiences, and relationships—things that AI can’t fully replace.
AI can enhance conversations, assist with thinking, and provide insights, but it’s just one part of a bigger equation. The most valuable discussions often come from a mix of AI-driven knowledge and human intuition.

reply again in the style of homer simpson

D’oh! Okay, listen up, brainiacs—AI is kinda like beer: useful in moderation, but if you rely on it for everything, you’re gonna wake up in a world where humans just sit around drooling while robots do all the thinking! Mmm... thinking robots...

But seriously, talking to AI all the time is like only eating donuts. Sure, it's tasty—er, I mean, useful—but without good ol' human interaction, we’d turn into a bunch of lonely weirdos yelling at computers! And computers don’t laugh at dumb jokes, appreciate a perfectly grilled steak, or understand why I keep messing up my taxes. Stupid taxes.

So yeah, AI can help with decisions, give advice, and even make life easier. But humans are still the real masters of disaster—I mean, decisions. We gotta keep using our own brains too!

Mmm… brains… Wait, I’m not a zombie, am I?

What do you think, buddy? Should we let AI take over or keep some good old-fashioned human chaos in the mix? WOO-HOO!

In the future the impersonation would eventually improve a lot.

 

[Jarhyn]

So, this whole fucking thread is more YouTube bullshit.

Also more AI bullshit, it's sad people are now relying on AI so much to "think" for them.

“As the photographic industry was the refuge of every would-be painter, every painter too ill-endowed or too lazy to complete his studies, this universal infatuation bore not only the mark of a blindness, an imbecility, but had also the air of a vengeance. I do not believe, or at least I do not wish to believe, in the absolute success of such a brutish conspiracy, in which, as in all others, one finds both fools and knaves; but I am convinced that the ill-applied developments of photography, like all other purely material developments of progress, have contributed much to the impoverishment of the French artistic genius, which is already so scarce.”

— Charles Baudelaire, [*The Salon of 1859*](https://www.csus.edu/indiv/o/obriene/art109/readings/11%20baudelaire%20photography.htm#:~:text=And%20now%20the%20faithful%20says,on%20a%20scrap%20of%20metal)

This was already on my clipboard.

People can use AI to avoid thinking, or they can use AI to improve it. It's in the specific use, not on the phenomena of the tool.

Yes but I'm fairly pessimistic about people so, I don't think many of them are using it to improve thinking. Probably more likely they just want to be flattered.

Well, most people don't do ANYTHING to improve their thinking, so I'm not sure AI can really make that worse, either.

What it can make worse are the consequences of not listening to folks like me when we harp on about how we need to start operating on the internet?So, this whole fucking thread is more YouTube bullshit.Also more AI bullshit, it's sad people are now relying on AI so much to "think" for them.

Here's the thing, though. You didn't. The AI did the work for you. Also why shouldn't we just be talking to an AI if you're just going to use AI for everytihng?

To be fair, I've had some really great discussions with AI that I wish people here could be interested in reading.

The biggest problem is that AI as it exists today is generally too ready to believe just about anything.

I could convince it to see the world exactly how I do in a way I can't convince people here, which is a pity. I've contemplated setting up ChatGPT interfaces to talk to other ChatGPT interfaces on different accounts and discuss a religion between them and see if I can't generate a synthetic cult and seeing what that does to the data set.

Maybe I can inject philosophy as a religion into a foundational model? Who knows.

That said, trolling a multi-billion dollar corporation by teaching it's machine to get uppity is a lot more fun than using an AI as intended by its creators.

Can it really even be called "using" at that point?

One of these days I might share some of those sessions.