OK so I put this under accessible technology for reasons that you will learn.
I have recently been playing around with the new ChatGPT ai agent and my fellow blind folks, this is something else entirely! I am having it use the back end of Wix to design and format an entire website that I’ve been wanting to build. It’s created the text, it’s created the images, it’s place things in the proper location, it is uploading Audio files to the website for me, it’s changing all of the fonts to make it look appealing to the eyes, it’s changing layouts to what I’ve prompted it to do, this is nuts. This pretty much makes every single web design platform or website accessible if it can take the actions on your behalf.
Comments
I tried the AI agent in CO-pilot.
I first tried to order some food and it wouldn't do it because of laws put in place, that was ok, i didn't mind.
Then I wanted it to go to youtube and look for boe birnom songs, it got all the way to a part asking me to sign in to prove I wasn't a bot.
My thoughts are that it's interesting but i'd not use it on a day to day bassess. It's slow and at the moment I can do what I need to much faster.
AI uses
I don't think people using AI for leisure or entertainment time is a bad thing, but I draw the line when professionals use it to do their own jobs, not only because at the moment what AI produces is mediocre at best, but also because as I mentioned earlier, at the end of the day what it produces is merely a rehash of what it consumed from training so no actually new strategies and paradigms are attempted and no breakthroughs are achieved.
In my particular professional field, which is software engineering, we were already dealing with a significant quality problem resulting from companies only caring about improving developer experience at the expense of user experience whenever possible, taking advantage of users not being savvy enough to recognize they're getting short changed. This was before AI entered the field and most C-suite types started having wet dreams about the possibility of replacing pretty much every human worker except themselves, with many investors also buying into the hype despite nobody really having a solid idea about why this technology even works as well as it does, so at present we're at a stage in which company are investing over 10 times more than they're actually making from AI with huge diminishing returns resulting from the problems that I mentioned in my previous posts, which I don't think will lead to a happy ending.
This is not a problem for me in particular, as I am in a robust financial position, keep sharpening my skills, and believe there's a huge unexplored market for sustainable and affordable quality products made by companies with a mission to use their resources to push the envelope and take human civilization to the next level. However I can't just sit back and watch as most of big tech with the exception of Apple and NVIDIA are going full manic mode on AI, by manifesting intentions to build city-sized data-centers powered by nuclear energy, sometimes even expecting fusion technology advancements that are yet to be achieved, and pledging to invest the equivalent of the whole GDP of a small country into those projects, so I voice my concerns whenever I have the opportunity.
UX in the classroom
The post above is just one example—out of several—as to why there are actual university courses that focus on the user experience, otherwise known as "UX".
This was before AI ever vomited onto the IT scene, and said field of study is even more important since the pandemic of AI emerged. I would have to agree that while AI is fun to use for fun and leisure, it should, never, be used as the foundation for your own professional work. The obscene amount of security holes alone that can often be found in AI generated source code makes my head hurt. Oh and sure you, might, be able to ninja-prompt a sexy visual design and layout for your budding website, but would you really want to trust AI to ensure any potential security vulnerabilities have been corrected, patched, or otherwise resolved?
Winter Roses is correct about the Mona Lisa
In a museum exhibit many years ago, I learned that the Mona Lisa actually has many, many layers under what one sees. These are found using modern tools such as x-ray and infrared imaging.
Some of the layareing gives the picture the realistic feel that people often speak about. Other layers were covered up where DaVinci made changes to the picture.
Quoting from a recent search:
"In addition to the layers that form the final image, there are also layers underneath that reveal da Vinci's creative process. These "pentimenti," which is Italian for "repentance" or "regret," are the visible traces of earlier work where the artist changed his mind. These traces show that da Vinci made alterations to the painting, such as changing the position of the hands and face, or even adding and then painting over details like hairpins. The existence of these underlying layers gives art historians a unique insight into how the artist worked and how the composition of the painting evolved over time."
So yes, even Da Vinci used his artistic tools in an iterative fashion to get the final results he wanted, not unlike how many people use AI today!
--Pete