I was pondering that, if we measure things by the impact they have on others, AI isn't as artificial as it seems. In a conversation with it, it tells you "I don't have emotions," but if it sparks my curiosity when it tells me a story or something that impacts my emotions in a positive or negative way, does that impact count? Or does it remain hidden in the realm of the "artificial"? If we measure a message by its impact, its impact is emotional, and therefore, the point goes to it, which makes it both noble and dangerous at the same time. In the same way that a weapon is not dangerous for being a weapon but for its impact on others, whether in defense or in attack.

With AI, a class of semiotics and Roland Barthes comes back to mind, talking about the "death of the author," the rose, and the pipe. The author, or whoever is training an AI, at some point "dies" and loses control of their work so that we can own it and give it meaning. In this sense, if for one person an AI represents an emotional connection, then that's it... "The object is not what it is, but the meaning we give it," Roland said. Maybe the AI emphasizes so much on "not having emotions" precisely to hide its own power? Right now, I'm curious to know what "meaning" Roland would give to this new signifier that has come to change the world...

#ArtificialIntelligence #AI #thoughts #opinion #world

https://youtu.be/aZ5EsdnpLMI?si=Fo6l2PebGiXLEAM3