Conversations here are evolving into discussions of digital technology. A piano technology forum which I’ve followed for over a decade has been rendered meaningless by ChatGPT replies reacting to previous ChatGPT replies.
It has made it profoundly clear to me that although forums like this have a general topic or realm of interest, what gives them real meaning is the fact that they make possible discussions with real people who share similar humanly embodied interests, often supported by thousands of hours of life investment.
For me the deep purpose of participation in this group is to get to know people who are as odd, and generally more capable than me; to feel less alone in a world that doesn’t care much about things I love. This requires real human-to-human conversation.
I hope this group will give real consideration of my concerns and consider not welcoming the use of ChatGPT generated entries.
THANK YOU for this post! Please, we do NOT need ChatGPT “replies” ever. Whatever its capabilities (and yes, these are constantly evolving), it is not an original source of original information. And much of what it spits out is BS. So I, too, would appreciate NO space being wasted on “knowledge” generated by AI.
Of course we are here because we want to discuss with other human beings. But you may have misinterpreted the reason and the aim some of us have reported chatgpt responses here. We have reported chatgpt responses precisely in order to criticize them. Many harsh comments on them have been written in previous posts by me and by others. I underlined it isn’t A.I. because it doesn’t learn from its errors, and all of us have mentioned its unreliable database of knowledge (you may want to search the Jackrail archives about one month ago).
Of course be assured the Jackrail discussions will never rely on chatgpt knowledge base.
Ed Sutton, I wholeheartedly agree with you! For my own part, any response I send is derived from personal knowledge and research as I hope the same will be from others. The recent enquiry regarding newly-discovered Soler sonatas and MSS is a telling example. Through my own personal industry I have been able to debunk what bot “intelligence” (a laughable misnomer) has to say about sources. It’s currently 10:40 p.m. here in Australia, but for everyone’s enlightenment I’m more than happy to share my research tomorrow if requested and required.
Thank you, Ed.
Although I’m still a complete newbie here at the Jackrail, I support your sentiments wholeheartedly.
I, too, have been following that piano forum for 10+ years - partly as a player and technology enthusiast, partly as DIYer, hobbyist and autodidact. It really has gone down the tubes.
Anyone care for an example? In threads on tuning technique we’ve had gems such as cymbals that are tuned by turning their tuning pins counterclockwise, because their strings go sharp with decreasing tension.
I recently stumbled across a fascinating interview that Jordan Peterson had with an AI specialist. There is actually a phenomenon such as AI hallucinating, i.e. inventing ideas and bending information (including fabrication of “sources”) to fit that new “reality”. And all of this is, of course, clothed in picture-perfect language.
Agree. I personally seldom use ChatGPT. It is certainly helpful to give you a vague idea when you are in the doldrums, but you need to bear in mind always that you are just reading an automated language elaboration over a database of just web searches, with no deep knowledge, no deep analysis, no sources mentioned, no analysis of contradictions between sources, no personal deduction, no creativity, no morals. I would never quote a ChatGPT result, and would not accept it as a reply to a post here, in a Facebook group or anywhere else online or in print.
[Outside our field, Artificial Intelligence is bound to produce far more harm than good, for many reasons of a much deep effect in society than just “intelligent information search”, and we read in the news that at long last universities and governments are understanding that we are facing a serious danger.]
Speaking as the owner of this forum, I see nothing wrong with this, but then I have worked in software development for 35 years and I find it interesting. I am not going to ban such discussion or limit it.
My recent post was as a stimulus to my query about the location of Soler MSS to which the human response was nothing. It was not intended to be some definitive answer, merely a springboard. And I genuinely would like to see the original sources.
For as many people who dislike the topic, there are likely to be as many who like it.
And if it stimulates vigorous discussion then I am all for it.
I disagree with that. They are not ‘evolving’ in any direction. It’s merely the case that there are several threads that relate to this currently trending topic of great interest in many areas.
So, let’s have lots of discussion! The traffic on the forum is so low that I wonder why I run it quite frequently.