The Kerfuffle over ChatGPT (2)

I originally wrote about this topic back in January, but since then the problem has only compounded.

Without having extracted actual data or done any rigourous research, I have noticed that topics about AI seem to be posted mainly by a small number of categories of people. Already some of these people have gained an impressive number of followers, nearing the order of 1 million.

AI Experts

One category is people who have spent years studying AI, and who have a deep expertise in the field. These individuals focus solely on technical concepts related to AI, without necessarily considering the broader implications of the technology or its impact on society. They may use technical jargon or speak in a way that is difficult for non-experts to understand.

AI experts have the deepest insights about AI, and are the ones I listen to the most to understand what is happening with AI technologies. Their posts are often quite technical and could be difficult for non-technical people to descipher.

Software Developers

Another category is software developers who develop AI-related systems, such as chatbots or machine learning modules. These individuals may be more focused on the technical aspects of AI development than on its societal implications.

I tend not to follow this type of user too much.

AI Application Engineers

AI application engineers, who apply AI technology in real-world contexts, represent the third category. These individuals may have a broader understanding of the technology's impact on society and how it can be used in ethical and responsible ways.

I get the impression that this type of person is busy integrating AI into some application, and their communications are mainly about promoting their applications.

Journalists

A fourth category of social media posts about AI comes from journalists who report on AI-related news and developments. These individuals may write about technical advancements, societal implications, or ethical concerns related to AI.

As with any field, journalism plays a crucial role in informing the public about the latest developments in AI. In theory, journalists can help to bridge the gap between technical experts and the general public by translating complex concepts into accessible language. However, in order to gain an audience, they tend to write more about sensational and provoking topics, which in my opinion distorts the facts about what is actually happening.

Marketers

Finally, we have marketers who promote AI products or services. These individuals may use sensational language or exaggerate the capabilities of AI in order to generate interest or sales.

Example of sensational language are "10x your productivity," "AI won't replace you: a person using AI will," and so on.

I find it amusing that although this category provides the least insightful information, it tends to have the greatest number of followers.

To be continued...

It is truly fascinating to observe how all this is developing. Personally, I am still trying to figure out who is worth following, and who I should be ignoring. In other words, what is signal, and what is noise.

What do you think?