1. He reminds viewers of deliberate attempts to take advantage of known human gullibility toward so-called "AI" ("Eliza Effect"), using dark patterns.^FN1
2. He cites various instances where so-called "tech" companies have lied about "AI" products and/or faked "AI" demos.
3. The creator of the video said he has included some sixty links to sources. He asserts that comments about "AI" that do not cite sources are unpersuasive. (That will not stop HN commenters from sharing their unsupported opinions.)
FN1. He tells viewers that "cute" is a dark pattern, e.g., a giggling "AI" voice. Long have I wondered about all the silly non-descriptive or misleading names chosen for contemporary software, for so-called "tech" companies, as well as the silly graphics and mascots. What is their purpose. For example, is the reason for the silly company names chosen by so-called "tech" companies more than just avoiding trademark disputes. (Yes.) If software developers and so-called "tech" companies intentionally use these tactics to trick people into thinking or doing something that is against those peoples' interests, then arguably these could be dark patterns. Obvious example of a misleading name: "OpenAI" is not open, and that may have serious consequences, but it's unlikely the company will be changing its name any time soon. The video creator mentions that the SEC has stated it is cracking down on the use of "AI washing" where companies add "AI" to names or otherwise use terminology to trick people into believing "AI" is used when in fact it is not.
In sum, the video is about the Silicon Valley "culture of lying". Perhaps ironic that the "AI" being pitched by SillyCon Valley today has no concept of a "lie". Despite the endless anthropomorphism, a computer running "AI" has no concepts whatsoever. Concepts come from people, not computers.
1. He reminds viewers of deliberate attempts to take advantage of known human gullibility toward so-called "AI" ("Eliza Effect"), using dark patterns.^FN1
2. He cites various instances where so-called "tech" companies have lied about "AI" products and/or faked "AI" demos.
3. The creator of the video said he has included some sixty links to sources. He asserts that comments about "AI" that do not cite sources are unpersuasive. (That will not stop HN commenters from sharing their unsupported opinions.)
FN1. He tells viewers that "cute" is a dark pattern, e.g., a giggling "AI" voice. Long have I wondered about all the silly non-descriptive or misleading names chosen for contemporary software, for so-called "tech" companies, as well as the silly graphics and mascots. What is their purpose. For example, is the reason for the silly company names chosen by so-called "tech" companies more than just avoiding trademark disputes. (Yes.) If software developers and so-called "tech" companies intentionally use these tactics to trick people into thinking or doing something that is against those peoples' interests, then arguably these could be dark patterns. Obvious example of a misleading name: "OpenAI" is not open, and that may have serious consequences, but it's unlikely the company will be changing its name any time soon. The video creator mentions that the SEC has stated it is cracking down on the use of "AI washing" where companies add "AI" to names or otherwise use terminology to trick people into believing "AI" is used when in fact it is not.
In sum, the video is about the Silicon Valley "culture of lying". Perhaps ironic that the "AI" being pitched by SillyCon Valley today has no concept of a "lie". Despite the endless anthropomorphism, a computer running "AI" has no concepts whatsoever. Concepts come from people, not computers.