Does AI mean we don't need the Semantic Web?

Re:Does AI mean we don't need the Semantic Web? by brookst on Saturday May 20, 2023 @12:08PM (#36013082)

I think you underestimate people's intelligence. Your hypothetical AI reddit won't deceive anyone because the people using it will be perfectly happy knowing it's all generated, the same way people playing video games are not "deceived" into thinking they are watching a film with actors, and people driving cars are not "deceived" into thinking there's a horse in there somewhere.

AI is complicated, but seeing it as mimicry of pre-AI reality is far too narrow to capture the real change (and the real concerns).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Does AI mean we don't need the Semantic Web? by jart on Saturday May 20, 2023 @02:12PM (#36014213)

Generally I agree, although it'll totally happen to people who get shadowbanned, since having an LLM reply to a banned user's invisible comments will make it less likely they'll refresh their VPN and create another account.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Does AI mean we don't need the Semantic Web? by jerf on Saturday May 20, 2023 @02:45PM (#36014500)

I am assuming that someone is setting out to deceive, not advertising it as a fake reddit. We already had that. (It was pretty funny.)

I'm also not just talking about someone hooking up the publicly-available and known language models of May 2023 to this. You going to guarantee me that "nobody" will be deceived in even just another year's worth of public progress? Or five? Ten?

And "nobody" is a really tall bar... should we at least set the bar at 100IQ or 110, just in the interests of fairness? 2022 discussions of "income inequality" will have nothing on 2032's if a 150 IQ and heavy education becomes necessary to navigate the internet successfully.

[ Parent | on HN ]