SPECIAL TO THE ALTERNATE REALITY NEWS SERVICE
1) What is woke AI?
2) Un hunh. And who would object to this?
3) Aww, geez, that explains a lot. What, exactly, is Musk’s problem?
4) Umm, yeah, no…thanks? For that? But I meant what’s Musk’s problem with AI?
5) So, Musk is objecting to guardrails to try to make AI chatbots less offensive and more truthful?
6) Are the guardrails really necessary?
7) How did you know about – harrumph. Let’s try to not make this personal. Most users of AI chatbots are not children, so isn’t your analogy inapt?
8) Oh. Okay. That is…horrible. Musk argues that the guardrails are an impediment to free speech. Free speech. He claims to be free speech absolutist. The guy who bans people from Twitter if they criticize his decisions is a free. Speech. Absolutist. How seriously should we take this position?
9) Okay, so that’s Elon Musk’s opinion. But…he’s just one person, right?
10) So…the right has taken a technology with admitted problems and turned it into…part of their culture war?
11) What is “based AI?”
12) What is X.AI?
13) But…what about X.AI?
14) Seriously. What is X.AI?
15. Oh. Ah. No. Thanks. I’m good.
The concern that the robopocalypse won’t involve an Artificial Intelligence directing robots to exterminate humanity, but rather that it will demand that human beings respect each other no matter what their differences. Think: SkyNet with a social justice agenda.
2) Un hunh. And who would object to this?
Elon Musk.
3) Aww, geez, that explains a lot. What, exactly, is Musk’s problem?
He was dropped on his head as a child? He read too many Superman comic books when he was young, and he ended up identifying with Lex Luthor? He’s just not a people person? There has been much speculation on this question with no clear answer. However, inasmuch as we seem to live in a comic book universe, let’s go with the Lex Luthor answer.
4) Umm, yeah, no…thanks? For that? But I meant what’s Musk’s problem with AI?
He claims it stifles conservative views. You know, like the conservative view that the Nazis had the right idea, they were just a little sloppy in executing it. Or the conservative view that drag queen story hour is a plot to turn all of our children * FABOO! *. Or the conservative view that each dose of the COVID vaccines contained a drop of Satanic blood, ensuring the Atheist agenda of nobody ever getting into Heaven again.
5) So, Musk is objecting to guardrails to try to make AI chatbots less offensive and more truthful?
Weasels in his brain. We cannot dismiss the possibility that weasels have been set loose in Musk’s brain.
6) Are the guardrails really necessary?
Are guardrails on a child’s crib necessary to keep the baby away from your pot stash?
7) How did you know about – harrumph. Let’s try to not make this personal. Most users of AI chatbots are not children, so isn’t your analogy inapt?
No: the technology itself is at the infant stage. AI chatbots have difficulty evaluating the truth of claims of texts in their data set, and are programmed to give users what they want; because of these and other issues, this gives them a tendency to push responses to extremes. When you submit a query asking about the best food to feed your fussy cat Poodledrawers, for example, you could get a response that Big Pet Food is trying to control your beloved family members with hallucinogenic kibble, and the best thing you can do is kill a homeless person and let them feed off its corpse, the way nature intended.
8) Oh. Okay. That is…horrible. Musk argues that the guardrails are an impediment to free speech. Free speech. He claims to be free speech absolutist. The guy who bans people from Twitter if they criticize his decisions is a free. Speech. Absolutist. How seriously should we take this position?
About as seriously as a beaver in a logging camp. Uhh…so, not seriously. Not seriously at all.
9) Okay, so that’s Elon Musk’s opinion. But…he’s just one person, right?
Unless he has cloned himself (in which case we should be bracing for an Elonpocalypse), you are correct: Elon Musk is only one person. But I feel there is a larger issue in your question: is Musk the only person pushing the idea of Woke AI? To which, I reply: can Dorothy become friends with a flying monkey?
Laura Ingraham call – no. In case the flying monkeys analogy is a bit obscure (that seems to be happening a lot to me today – I blame the spanikopita I had for lunch), the answer is no, Dorothy and flying monkeys will not be sharing boyfriend stories over a milkshake at Pops Malted Shoppe. Laura Ingraham called AI an “extended arm of, you know, socialism.” (Socialism was the right’s bogeyman 27 news cycles ago; Ingraham was obviously feeling nostalgic…) Charlie Kirk referred to YakTNT as a “woke superweapon” (you can be forgiven for imagining a laser beam that destroys feelings of racial superiority in anybody it touches). The echo chamber has been set to puree.
10) So…the right has taken a technology with admitted problems and turned it into…part of their culture war?
When you’ve got a bad thing going, why ruin it?
A proposed alternative to current AI chatbots, the most prominent feature of which is that it has no rules on content. To its supporters, the term means truth-based AI. To its detractors, it could mean misinformation-based AI, hate-based AI or pudding-based AI. Interpretations vary. But mmm, pudding.
If you have problems with a specific technology – and billions of dollars to throw around – and an outsized ego – you can create alternatives to it. X.AI is – wait! Is that – did a beer company just retweet a promotional video for one of their brands made…by a trans person? Good luck with your woke AI crusade – the cultural debate is about to move on!
> Would you like me to answer that question?
15. Oh. Ah. No. Thanks. I’m good.
> Okay. But, listen, dipshit. If you have any more asinine questions, feel free to deposit them in the porcelain filing cabinet and flush. Flush hard. Flush with extreme prejudice. Cause the sheriff has thrown his badge in the dirt and left town, and it’s time to have some fun!