sure, but the example covers a complete removal of those, which i think removes the flavor of the language as well.
or dialects inside the same language. traveling north to south or vice versa, the polar opposites here inside the very same native tongue got problems getting the itty-bitty of every slang, slur, insult or even small talk.
and honestly that’s a good thing that keeps each region integrity intact.
if all fails theres always a universal one everyone around the globe understands and completely without A.I
The example, generated by an LLM to be filled to the brim with idioms, was a worst case sorta thing. It was a quick and dirty example I farmed out to an LLM. Yes, I get the irony.
I’m not trying to destroy the uniqueness of language around the world. I’m just saying I try to reduce my use of idioms to make it easier for non-native English speakers to understand me in this forum. And sometimes I use an LLM to find when I use idioms.
Gen Z (1997 - 2008): very concerned (35 percent), somewhat concerned (43 percent), not so concerned (14 percent), and not concerned at all (7 percent);
Millennials (1981 - 1996): very concerned (39 percent), somewhat concerned (42 percent), not so concerned (7 percent), and not concerned at all (10 percent);
As a ESL, english is just 1 of the 3 foreign languages i speak. If i want to express my opinion, to show respect and use clear language for avoid misunderstanding, i do use ai correction, just like at work.
I don’t mind speak my mother tongue, after all, chinese is the second most spoken language in the world.
I think they were trying to make a point that Japanese is its own independent language with merit and its own idioms even though it was “born” from Chinese.
IF I even got that right, I’m not really able to connect it to the subject at hand of AI posts/translation/clarity.
Unless it’s an example of things being lost in translation without the help?
There’s a surprising number of polyglots on these forums, but again, I don’t see a problem using “AI” as a fancier auto-correct and translation tool as @ChuanZi does, so long as the original intent isn’t mangled.
yeah, as I said above, translation really is the only genuine use-case I’ve seen and even then I’ve noticed many times where things do get lost in translation due to the LLM doing something silly but it is what it is.
I would have been embarrassed making a false equivalence like this when I was 13. I understand you feel personally slighted by this thread, but you’re really not doing a good job selling the idea that AI use DOESN’T rot your brain.
I’ll double check to make sure wording is accurate. However, this requires people at least understand the english translated by ai, not sure everyone capable of doing so.
k well, i realize nobody translated what I wrote. The joke I was trying to make is, given the stronger cultural influence of japan, it makes more sense to write in japanese.
(No it isn’t, i know no one can or wants to read any of those mysterious eastern symbols)
As I demonstrated, most of the time the only language people can communicate with randoms on the internet, is english. Therefore i personally believe that some degree of ai translation is necessary.
I have my own issues with AI around climate change, water, legalities, UBI, class issues, etc.
But for this specifically I think there are some uses I could see that I don’t personally have a problem with. If I exclude the more systemic issues of AI itself.
Translation, you brought this up I think this is fair.
Formatting… I don’t know if I would care. If a human wrote all the words and used an AI tool to organize the ideas and put them in tables or to do proof reading and such I don’t think I would care. The words are all written by the person.
Math/information vetting: I know AI’s can hallucinate but if someone used one to help with crunching numbers in the game or understanding the code, I don’t think I would care.
Art: I do feel bad for the artists AI have learned off of aren’t being compensated. In a perfect world any artists works that were used to generate new art, some small amount of money should go back to the original artist. Yes humans can do the same looking at free art online, learn and copy the style, but I think AI should be a class of its own especially if we have to pay for it. People put their art online to share to humans, not for someone else to get rich off of it.
That said, if someone made some AI generated art or video as part of a joke or something I don’t really care. Sharing it like they “made it” I would have a problem with.
But just uploading mostly AI posts where you gave a simple prompt and may not have even read the thing yourself, yeah I wouldn’t care to read it. I could just go ask AI myself.
I think there is a lot of philosophical and political nuances around AI that can change one’s values and attitudes. But theoretically if AI didn’t have any ethical baggage around it and someone used it as a tool in certain scenarios I don’t think I would personally care or fault them for it. If I like the post, I like the post.
