Amazing article; I particularly liked Simon pointing out this potential new trend catalyzed by the capability to generate media from AI: > [T]here’s likely a future inflection point where having more humans on your project is actually beneficial because it means you start off with a higher likelihood of it being shared. If the extreme becomes that we may be able look at anything for cheap, then the differentiator will become who had made it. In other words, the human media is the human message. You can’t automate authenticity. This, to me, makes so much sense and is the reason why, even today, a lot of the time at work is spent on social media, simply documenting publicly the fruits of one's work. Years ago, I learned that an artwork is nothing without its documentation, but that is true today for many industrial processes, too, be it to comply with regulations or to make others understand the significance of one's work.
I really liked this one and also believe there's value in human curation. In 1993, Yahoo was just a list of cool Internet websites named "Jerry's Guide to the Worldwide Web." And these times were really good for serendipity. After a few years, it turned out that Google was a more efficient way to find content online, so we leaned into algorithms guiding our choices. Instead of asking a friend for a recommendation, we started asking Google. If we did otherwise, it was even ridiculed ("Just Google it!"), and a bit of our human connection was traded for efficiency. I think one of the few places that haven't turned (that much) into algo-driven spaces is Reddit. There are many niche communities, and after a few weeks of hanging out in the subreddit, you recognize most of the posters. Funnily enough, we made a full circle. When you want to find something in Google AD 2024, you typically have to type " + reddit", to avoid SEO-optimized bs. That would suggest that genuine human curation (Reddit) might have remained a more efficient search tool than algorithmic feed (Google). Or maybe, to give Google some credit, as Reddit search is bad, those two working together are the most potent mix.
What concerns me in this respect is that ‘Just Google it!’ is currently being replaced by ‘Just ChatGPT it!’ Instead of presenting us with a long list of sources to choose from based on your query, it just presents us with a single one size answer. Besides limiting our experience, it also does not present an option to quickly compare and/or check sources. ChatGPT is a handy tool to get easy answers, but the trade-off is that it impoverishes our experience of the internet and of knowledge.
In this respect, there are probably a surprising number of people who just think the internet is Google. What if the day comes people think the internet is just ChatGPT?
Agreed @mishaderidder.eth, and actually, Reggie James just published a new article also talking about how LLMs remove sources from content and that they're like memory recall machines and that this influences identity directly [1]. > Memory, I have come to believe, is the basis of identity. > It’s why diseases like Alzheimer’s is so destructive. With the shattering of memory comes the collapse of the self. > AI has emerged as a collaborative memory. And to some publisher’s dismay — takes the previous 30 years of internet production collapsed into one point, one brain, one prompt line. > Any memory device, is fundamentally an identity device. To be in the business of memory transformation, augmentation, extension, even simply storage — is to be in the business of identity. - 1: https://news.kiwistand.com/stories?index=0x65b77fdd6f1a41219c41714a363471c1f2fbe38878c7ce08b0798b35e2ece6046fc53c90
I remember my mom saying, "If something isn't on Google, it doesn't exist." But if you look for niche stuff, you often won't find it in Google (or will find it on Page #127). So, for some - especially younger - people, ChatGPT might become a window into the world. From what I remember, if you ask it to search on the Internet for "What are the best productivity apps for Macbook," it would add sources. But it doesn't add sources if you don't ask it to use search.