Fabio Manganiello on Nostr: Dilution through #AI. It seems that, when you don't have sufficient content, the new ...
Dilution through #AI. It seems that, when you don't have sufficient content, the new trend is to ask generative AI to create that content for you. Even when it comes to sensitive statistics such as voting intentions.
Humans no longer pick up the phone when pollsters call them, thus political polls are often inaccurate because of small samples size.
We could try and ask ourselves why humans no longer pick the phone - maybe because most countries don't have their citizens reliable mechanisms to ask for their phone numbers not to receive targeted calls, plus with our phone numbers included in dozens of data leaks we've ended up in a situation where people receive multiple cold calls per day (from recruiters, energy companies, insurance companies, book publishers who call you to ask what you thought of a book you've bought, shops that aggressively inform you about offers etc.), we're all sick of them, we have no way out, so we just started blocking or dropping calls from unknown numbers?
Well, apparently this is a problem too hard to solve even for Harvard scholars.
Instead, their solution seems to involve, again, gen AI - probably because, like any other business, academia also receives more attention and funding when they sprinkle a bit of AI on top of their stuff, even when it solves no actual problem.
So, instead of asking humans who they would vote for, try to understand the nuances of their thoughts and concerns, let those messages bubble up to candidates so they can adjust their campaign to meet voters' demand, why not just segment humans into a bunch of shallow segments (the socialist Millennial, the conservative Boomer, the liberal city dweller, the rancorous rural voter who feels left behind...), have some AI agents replicate how those people would respond, and then just enjoy AI take down whatever is left of our democracy through feedback loops that exponentially enforce existing biases?
https://futurism.com/the-byte/harvard-experts-polling-ai
Humans no longer pick up the phone when pollsters call them, thus political polls are often inaccurate because of small samples size.
We could try and ask ourselves why humans no longer pick the phone - maybe because most countries don't have their citizens reliable mechanisms to ask for their phone numbers not to receive targeted calls, plus with our phone numbers included in dozens of data leaks we've ended up in a situation where people receive multiple cold calls per day (from recruiters, energy companies, insurance companies, book publishers who call you to ask what you thought of a book you've bought, shops that aggressively inform you about offers etc.), we're all sick of them, we have no way out, so we just started blocking or dropping calls from unknown numbers?
Well, apparently this is a problem too hard to solve even for Harvard scholars.
Instead, their solution seems to involve, again, gen AI - probably because, like any other business, academia also receives more attention and funding when they sprinkle a bit of AI on top of their stuff, even when it solves no actual problem.
So, instead of asking humans who they would vote for, try to understand the nuances of their thoughts and concerns, let those messages bubble up to candidates so they can adjust their campaign to meet voters' demand, why not just segment humans into a bunch of shallow segments (the socialist Millennial, the conservative Boomer, the liberal city dweller, the rancorous rural voter who feels left behind...), have some AI agents replicate how those people would respond, and then just enjoy AI take down whatever is left of our democracy through feedback loops that exponentially enforce existing biases?
https://futurism.com/the-byte/harvard-experts-polling-ai