Possible effects on cognitive function of using AI.

[Viala]

Common sense will always look like doom through rose colored glasses.

 

[hapl808]

You'd get goodie points for that comment in black mirror reality. It's kind of defending corpocracy at the expense of our freedom, financial safety and sanity, but why?

Not sure what this means?

I'm not defending it - I'm pointing out it exists. It's difficult to make change if we don't understand systems. For instance - government surveillance in the US is getting much worse. But it's existed for a long time with notable flashpoints (Patriot Act, DHS, etc). If people want to address government surveillance but act like it's brand new, then we lose context (DHS caused many issues, and recent massive increases to ICE and CBP make DHS look like small potatoes).

But my point is generally that 'new AI' is not the bad guy - the bad guys are governments and corporations that wield these tools to worsen society instead of improve it.

Like medicine isn't a problem - a medical system that PE leverages for maximum profits at the expense of marginalized groups is a problem.

That's why I said how AI is implemented is incredibly important. I might be be okay with sacrificing a bit of privacy to an algorithm in order to further cutting edge medical research and save lives - but not to lower Delta's voucher expense line item. Sadly, the US has shown it cares very little about medical research, no matter whether it's AI driven or done with a slide rule and an overhead projector.

 

[Viala]

Not sure what this means?

What's the point of pointing out it exists, doing it only serves those who are implementing these changes. We are accustomed to some things, that doesn't make them ok. It's a crockpot full of frogs slowly boiled. People are no longer surprised that devices eavesdrop on them, we came from 'it's a conspiracy theory' to 'oh, it actually happens, well' very quickly.

People at the top in this world care about their own interests first and foremost, they are predatory. Their goal is to always secure the pockets of shareholders, the rest is just cannon fodder. These are the type of guys that you had your wish for. Can't miss that in the whole pros and cons equation.

Industrial and digital era were supposed to make our lives better, meanwhile more and more people can't afford healthy food, shelter, many can't start a family because of financial struggles. Quality of our lives goes down quickly, it sped up since pandemic event and massive money printing. It won't be different with AI. It's the ultimate tool in hands of people in power. Us being ok with AI everywhere will only make their job easier.

 

[pamojja]

People at the top in this world care about their own interests first and foremost,

I realized as a young adult, the political arena is set up for scrupleless power seekers. Doing a 21 day-water fast, declared as hunger-strike with a friend in front of the local parliament. It was simply repudiated by the governor, as allegedly secretly being fed, and therefore ignored. That's how power hungry politicians of all color work against opposition.

Someone decent couldn't withstand in such arenas for long. However, this governance system is really human nature since ancient times. When tribes needed protection and providers, of course the most scrupleless could provide. Against wild animals, other tribes, and for hunting. They became Chiefs, later Kings, then presidents, and now anonymous international investment conglomerates.

So for me, it was clear from a very early age, that the real ballot happens by one buck earned, and one's buck spent - which are already 2 votes given to this kind of governance. The only way not supporting this system, is living as far as possible outside our currency systems. Which is possible for some time, but found myself back in about 15 years later on at least, the least consciously possible income.

With my diseases, and their not so cheap remedies, 15 further years later I already dependent on some more.

That's the state most of us find ourselves. People at the bottom and top in this world are different in minor shades only. We are all more or less responsible for this mess society finds itself in.

AI doesn't bring more dangers than already existing since my youth (pollutions, nuclear meltdowns, wars..) and I at least tried to contribute the least possible, for some time. AI will speed it all up, only. The dusk of this civilization, and a new dawn.

No reason to take different perspectives personal. We were all not asked to be born into this mess.

 

[Viala]

The dusk of this civilization, and a new dawn.

Yeah the dusk and a new dawn. We may as well watch the world burn, get our popcorn and try to survive as small atomic parts of this global show. Obvious things are obvious, not much can be changed. I know. We may slow it down, yet it's coming. AI doesn't bring more danger as in direction that it's headed, it brings more danger because of unprecedented scale. It won't be the same as in industrial revolution.

Seeing the future from the perspective of guys in power, if I would think the way they think, I know what I'd do with this new tech, it's a bright future but not for us. So solar flares cross my mind sometimes. There is also this minuscule chance that majority will see what is going on and somehow change the outcome, but oh they have developed strategies for that already too. I would. So maybe popcorn it is, but since I am and most of us are on the watery side of the crockpot, it's better to have a say in all this.

Our human nature seems to evolve into neocortex dominance in elites and away from limbic empathy, while masses receive reptilian brain reinforcement. That sounds like a split in homo sapiens evolution. We're deep in this biological entanglement of our firing neurons and we are introducing silicic AI god into the equation. They win because their skill set is broader. The only way to overcome this would be to be more like them, but when we look into the abyss, the abyss stares back.

We may go into our sacred caves of semi comfortable lives, but.

 

[pamojja]

Seeing the future from the perspective of guys in power, if I would think the way they think, I know what I'd do with this new tech, it's a bright future but not for us.

In this one point I seem to disagree. Us would be almost the same, if through something like destiny we were in power. Or, at least, most of us. Its human nature. All dictators failed in the end. Thats human nature too.

So no more popcorn or sacred caves for me. But experimentally through daily living trying to evade the popcorn mentality. Not as an imperative, just as choice. Where next the unsolved question of free will raises its head..

 

[Viala]

Us would be almost the same, if through something like destiny we were in power. Or, at least, most of us. Its human nature.

But I agree with that. The difference is which families we are born into. Does that make us hypocrits? Talking about being decent haha. Although some say that which family we're born into is also a choice or at least that we can influence that, that would make an interesting plot twist. Free will, if that exists, so these are choices or urges, depending on what feels better or right, so it's unsolved, and there's the next question about good and evil.

 

[southwestforests]

Chicago newspaper prints a summer reading list. The problem? The books don't exist
Chicago Sun-Times confirmed AI was used to generate list of real authors but fake books

Natalie Stechyson · CBC News · Posted: May 20, 2025 4:04 PM EDT | Last Updated: May 21

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/chicago-sun-times-ai-book-list-1.7539016

In a statement to CBC News, Chicago Sun-Times spokesperson Victor Lim further explained that the insert was "licensed editorial content from King Features, a unit of Hearst, that was not created by, or approved by, the Sun-Times newsroom."

"But it is unacceptable for any content we provide to our readers to be inaccurate," he added.

King Features is an American content producer. Lim explained that the newspaper has historically relied on content partners for broader coverage beyond their primarily local scope, but "given recent developments, it's clear we must actively evaluate new processes and partnerships."

In a statement to CBC News, The Sun-Times Guild — the union that represents editorial employees at the newspaper — confirmed that the summer guide was a syndicated section produced externally "without the knowledge of the members of our newsroom."

"We're deeply disturbed that AI-generated content was printed alongside our work. The fact that it was sixty-plus pages of this 'content' is very concerning — primarily for our relationship with our audience but also for our union's jurisdiction," the guild wrote.

But … how?​

The list was generated by freelancer Marco Buscaglia, a Chicago-based writer, content strategist and teacher. He confirmed that he failed to fact check what he gleaned using AI.

"Stupidly, and 100 per cent on me, I just kind of republished this list that [an AI program] spit out," he said in a statement published Tuesday evening by the Chicago Sun-Times.

"Usually, it's something I wouldn't do," he added. "I mean, even if I'm not writing something, I'm at least making sure that I correctly source it and vet it and make sure it's all legitimate. And I definitely failed in that task."

Some social media users have said it appears other articles in the Heat Index may have also been AI-generated, pointing to experts who don't seem to exist. For instance, screenshots of an article called "Summer food trends" quotes a food anthropologist named Catherine Furst of Cornell University, who can't be found on the internet.

Another screenshot of an article about "campus hammock culture" appears to quote a professor of leisure studies who also, evidently, can't be traced online.

As NPR reports, the Sun-Times' fake summer reading list was published two months after the paper announced 20 per cent of its staff had accepted buyouts.

In its statement, the Chicago Sun-Times said this "should be a learning moment for all of journalism that our work is valued."

The article is being removed from digital editions, according to the statement.It said that the paper was updating its policies to "ensure that all such third-party licensed editorial content meets the same editorial standards as content we create ourselves."

Human behavior is at the root of it every time.

 

[andyguitar]

Indeed, some forums have now banned AI articles, which I think is a good move.

I have suggestion about that and AI generated content. How about posters make it known that their content is AI generated by putting AI at the start of their post?

 

[Hip]

I have suggestion about that and AI generated content. How about posters make it known that their content is AI generated by putting AI at the start of their post?

I think people often do state that the text they are posting is AI generated. But that does not change the fact that AI text is referred to as "AI slop", meaning that is it low-quality and lacking in effort.

 

[Rufous McKinney]

Content Strategist...? Great content, all fake.

I've got huge problems with the way journalism is now deployed,. People who know nothing what so ever, are hired to write things. What they wrote is often regurgitated from elsewhere. On that goes.

See the first Season of White Lotus (HBO). A young writer is on her honeymoon. Her free lance article on this famous woman, was simply regurgitated BS.

 

[Viala]

It will be fun in the following years when AI articles will multiply and then other AIs will copy that articles and it will happen ad infinitum, it can be interesting since the old content is already disappearing from the internet.

 

[andyguitar]

It will be fun in the following years when AI articles will multiply and then other AIs will copy that articles and it will happen ad infinitum

I would expect that errors are already being copied and being seen as facts. Looks like we are fu*ked.

 

[Wayne]

How about posters make it known that their content is AI generated by putting AI at the start of their post?

I agree, and always clearly state when something I post is AI generated. It seems most everybody is doing the same thing. I think Phoenix Rising is still in the process of figuring out a protocol for this all. I think another courtesy would be to put most AI content into a spoiler link, which I almost always do as well. Long AI content can easily clutter up a thread, and people with ME/CFS don't do well with clutter (I know I don't).

 

[Viala]

I would expect that errors are already being copied and being seen as facts. Looks like we are fu*ked.

We are. What I don't get is why everyone is diving head first into it, despite clearly seeing that it's faulty.