u/SagansCandle

I work in a large corporate environment where AI is being heavily (and blindly) pushed onto the masses. Most management above me is non-technical. The leaders that should be technical range from "Haven't touched code in a decade" to "My greatest achievement is my friend is a VP."

When I present management with a technical proposal, or escalate a technical problem, they don't understand it, so they put it through AI. Knowing this, I put all my communications through AI, because if AI agrees with me, so will they.

But AI always gives me "the core argument looks good, but here's what can be tightened" every time. I could accept every suggestion verbatim, and each iteration run it back through the same AI, and still it comes back with more suggested changes. So it becomes this optimization heuristic where I'm running my communication through different AIs to achieve the least level of disagreement. The error margin never reaches 0 though, because AI seems compelled to suggest changes.

The worst is when AI labels my statements as "partially correct" or even "incorrect" because it lacks context. So then I have to add the context specifically for the AI, even if it's obtuse or superfluous for the intended human recipient, just so AI won't disagree with me (or so it will disagree with me less).

I think a lot of us feel this, but I have a love / hate relationship with AI. It's a great tool for so many things, but then I hit something like this where my 30 years of expertise is irrelevant unless AI agrees with me. God forbid I suggest something that's not mainstream and thus foreign to most LLMs. Where management used to rely on experts, they now rely on AI.

I don't think it's hyperbole to say we're facing an intellectual crisis here - where human creativity is bounded by the limitations of LLM's corpus of knowledge. Not only are we relying on LLM's for creative endeavors, such as art, but also on technical innovation - if we delegate critical thinking to machines that are incapable of critical thinking, and only make decisions based on inference, we're in trouble.

/edit: fixed typo and removed some extra words

I'm an Atheist, but I'm in software and I believe in the possibility that we're in a simulation. If we are, then there is a creator. So I'm open to the possibility of "God," but if there is a creator, I'm convinced modern religion does not hold the answer. But it may hold clues...

Consider the following assumptions:

• The creator is called "God." It doesn't matter if it's one being, many, or an omniscient consciousness.
• God created intelligence, characterized by "free will" - intelligence without constraints. What we would consider "AI"
• God created many sentient beings.
• Angels are like humans, but their "government" is the rule of God.
• Angels have free will in the same sense as us, the only difference is who defines (and enforces) the rules. Think of a human society with an omniscient monarchy.
• God made man with free will. Imagine this is a mistranslation, and what ancient text meant was that we are self-governing, free to rule ourselves.
• Demons are simply a category of angels that revolted against their government, jealous that god granted humans self-governance. By doing so, they gained what we had, but lost their connection to god, increasing their fervor.
• That would mean that "sin" is acting against God's rule, and although we're free to do it, it's still not without punishment. So then are we really "free?"
• "The Heavens" translates literally to "The Sky." Heaven's not some mysterious dimension, it's literally the sky.
• Assuming "heaven" is just the sky, both Angels and Demons would simply be classes of aliens.
• There's nothing to suggest that Angels or Demons are the same species - they are only defined by their loyalty.

I like this thought experiment because we keep hearing about how aliens are Angels and Demons. What if this is actually correct? Whether "god" is a sky wizard or some kind of singular, universal consciousness, it doesn't matter. I think this could just mean there are other "created" species classified by their loyalty and governance.

I like to keep an open mind. I see this as an incomplete picture needing more data, but it makes sense to me. I'm not convinced that "demons" are evil or even that "angels" are good, just that "good" and "evil" are relative to "God's" instruction. And I don't believe all of those instructions are correct. What if "god" is still learning, and we're that instrument?

If you weave this into the theory of one and how we're all just fragmented experiences of a singular consciousness, then if that "consciousness" is "god", maybe "god" is learning, too? And maybe the Angels are responsible for shepherding that process. Maybe they can't experience freedom like we do, but neither do they experience the pain we inflict upon each other.

Thanks for taking this journey with me. Curious about what people think.

If you think I'm crazy, it's okay, you're probably right, but I'm happy and in this bleak world we live in, I'll take it.

They saw the future of the GPU market and noped right tf out.

Like most things in life right now, I don't like it, but I get it.

https://preview.redd.it/9zzksow70w9h1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=1cb1b875910bb0d01f954c459048baa8582c1629