In the not too distant future:
Footnote sources to articles will all link to ChatGPT.
Footnote sources to articles will all link to ChatGPT.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How to Speak With ChatGPT in the Background on iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When I was still in school, teachers still took great strides to tell us not to cite Wikipedia. That’s not to say that we couldn’t use Wikipedia in our research, but Wikipedia isn’t a primary source, and we were instructed (rightly, I’d say) to use primary sources where possible and to use academic sources over general sources where possible (there were definitely some classes, though, where we had to cite some non-academic sources, such as the paper I wrote about Will It Blend for the digital media and society class I had to take).
I reckon that AI should be treated similarly. Heck, even Wikipedia can be flat out factually wrong because of various biases (especially political ones). That really isn’t all THAT different from AI hallucinations.
Seriously. My first reaction from the headline was "Holy Sh*t. Are you kidding me?" It only got worse as I read the article. I cannot believe this was approved. This is all sorts of bad.
Same here, even if I got a Iphone and it came with it, I would disable it.
People say their Android phone listen to them and now they want us to install something that does on iphones, computers and Android phones.
No thanks.
By the way, Android phones don't listen to anyone.
I often have way more productive conversations with GPT in writing than in voice. It talks a lot, easily interrupts, and also for math or coding help, just says to refer to the chat.
Summarizes a summary that you had to read to make sure the summary is correct!!😛😛😛
I hope Apple will come out with better solutions to this and not only allow iPhone 15pro and up. It definitely shows it’s possible for any iPhone that runs iOS 17.
I work for a supermarket, and they are going to use AI for forecasting the amount fo stock we need, so if the weather is going to sunny say, they will send in a load of stuff for sunny weather, like ice cream and Pop (soda for the U.S. peeps).
I live in a place where the weather seems to be different from the rest of the UK. so I so we will wait and see. Also, it will check what is on the selves and then send a message to somone if the shelf is empty, we will see how long it will be before it gets confused when somone puts something back in the wrong place.
I don't think iut will happen in our shop for a while, but it is about cutting jobs again.
I work for a medical AI company. AI is only as useful as your use case. Most of the time AI is a barely useful widget. Our technology speeds up the identification of emergent health crises, saving lives.
Scott Galloway has a great perspective on AI and jobs. You’re not going to lose your job to AI. You’re going to lose your job to someone who knows how to use AI.
Scott Galloway has a great perspective on AI and jobs. You’re not going to lose your job to AI. You’re going to lose your job to someone who knows how to use AI.
This all seems so easily done by humans. AI is only often useful for less obvious decision-making that requires loads of data analysis. Like, should we invest in new locations to open up new supermarket branches that have lower costs of real estate?
Those use cases you mentioned seem to be using AI for the sake of AI, as I assume some sweet talker sold it to the executives.
Just wait until next pandemic hits and then all this AI **** is going to get super confused when people are stealing all the toilet paper again.
Unless the terms they provide include their rights to use your data. This has privacy and security issues written all over it.
Here is a question. “Do you gain implicit agreement from other people for data harvesting when you have this background function on?”
That sounds like a super smart original thought but it's not.
In many sectors "AI" doesn't apply at all. In the sectors where "AI" might apply forms of automation, scripting and so called "artificial intelligence" tools have been around for a long time, so those employees have already been using it for ages and will simply adjust by natural adoption.
If a profession or task doesn't need it, it doesn't need it. If a profession or task needs it, it will be adopted anyway.
The idea every job can be automated or run on Jensen Huang's graphics card is a fairy tale. It's for stock pumpers and doomsayers. They're telling you the future is The Jetsons and if you don't buy 20 monthly subscriptions from them they will make you homeless and jobless.
If I was in government I would have thrown these people into jail for false marketing and scaring people. They're worse than Elizabeth Holmes.
Seems like every time I read about AI replacing something it comes at a cost. A much worse experience for the customer.
But humans need to be paid, they get ill and have time off, but still need to be paid, they have to have holidays, but still need to be paid. A machine will carry on doing these things 24/7 as long as it don't have problems, and that is the thing.
We have occasionally,, more so over the last few months have had problems with what we use now, the whole thing going belly up, affecting stores, depots, even checkouts and phones and that is before we touch AI.
Computers get updated, and when those updates go wrong, things go belly up, seems to be a thing with Microsoft, and what happens when these systems get hacked? That have been happening a fair bit over the world.
I am at the age, where it don't really bother me about being replaced, sometimes I wish they would
. It is the youngsters that will have the problem unless they find a job that is pretty difficult to be replaced, like an electrician, plumber or even a cook/chef. Yes, I know they have machines that can cook, well kind of, but I doubt very much if a small café/restaurant will ever have one.
I don't mind technology, i use it in my house to turn on lights, heating and other stuff, but I would not rely on it.
All about money and dat now, getting customers to spend as much as they can and getting as much data out of them as well., this is why Loyalty cards have been linked to prices.
Don't bother with them myself.
Oh yeah a friend of mine works as a forecaster in the UK… AI is definitely coming for his job
I doubt most tech being used now would replace anyone, because of a very simple fact, KPIs. In most cases, AI makes more mistakes than the average mid-performer human. This can be seen especially in things that most people would consider the easiest to replace with AI. Think data entry, customer service, and client relationships management. Those tasks are incredibly repetitive and often don't require any special skills, hence not demanding any high salaries, but also need many many people. So, they should be simple enough to automate/replace with AI, yet, most companies that tried doing so have failed. Amazingly, some companies now offer these services with the title "Get through to a human" as their advertisement.But humans need to be paid, they get ill and have time off, but still need to be paid, they have to have holidays, but still need to be paid. A machine will carry on doing these things 24/7 as long as it don't have problems, and that is the thing.
We have occasionally,, more so over the last few months have had problems with what we use now, the whole thing going belly up, affecting stores, depots, even checkouts and phones and that is before we touch AI.
Computers get updated, and when those updates go wrong, things go belly up, seems to be a thing with Microsoft, and what happens when these systems get hacked? That have been happening a fair bit over the world.
I am at the age, where it don't really bother me about being replaced, sometimes I wish they would
Yes, I know they have machines that can cook, well kind of, but I doubt very much if a small café/restaurant will ever have one.
I don't mind technology, i use it in my house to turn on lights, heating and other stuff, but I would not rely on it.
Depending on the context, AI might help make skilled people faster, which may lower the number of jobs needed in the short term, but more importantly, make it much harder to get an entry-level job in the future. Because now, you can't be just a junior, you kind of need to start off as a mid-level employee just to keep up.
I hope things do get better though.
Right, I agree emphatically. I’m an automation developer, so this is probably partially my professional bias speaking, but neural network AI looks primarily like an automation technology to me. It allows you to automate tasks that used to need manual intervention (even if you could outsource it to something like Mechanical Turk), which lets you do all sorts of tasks that were simple but prohibitively expensive at scale from a labor perspective. It also would help with things like brainstorming or mind mapping, to gather or process ideas (much the same way that high ranking human chess players use computer chess engines to help them prepare and to test out new strategies), but it’s most useful for tasks that used to require unskilled grunt work and were thus prohibitively expensive to perform at scale.
It will certainly replace some people, there is no doubt about that, just wait when it all goes belly up. I will just sit back and watch the chaos. Not bothered myself, when it all went belly up at work a couple of weeks ago, I just laughed and did what I could before I went home.
I use cash most of the time, so the problems did not affect me.