I agree there is some implicit bias in this reporting, particularly because Nathan is colleagues (or at the very least previous colleagues) with Ian Hogarth, who is currently the chair of the UK AI Safety Institute, recently renamed to the "AI Security Institute".

So, I would have to take reporting on safety with a grain of salt. That said, I do think there are a lot of other interesting insights throughout the presentation.

And what does it mean to "use AI at home or work". Firing off the occasional ChatGPT? Using one of the many chatbots that's integrated everywhere?

There's a big difference between using it like Google and really enhancing your workflow with it by automating parts of your work.

I mean, does a Google search count as "using AI"?

just a quick point here; 1.2K is highly statistically significant, even for a national level poll/survey. The issue here is the potential for selection bias, which seems primarily to be driven by people who want to do the survey not sure how this ultimately skews the results but 1.2K is easily an adequate sample size

In my circles it is obviously 100%.

Okay I do toy with local image generation when I get extremely bored...

But other than that only AI use is when google forces it on me. And then gets things wrong... Which is easily found out by comparing it's output and synopsis on the links it give...

They bought a cool url gotta give em that.

looking up stateof.lol

The black blaze stats were published by AI investors?

Or given the HDD setting, HDD investors? Are you sure they weren't published by the technical people that actually analyzed the failure rates of disks? ... instead of polling for opinions from Internet strangers, on platforms that are full of bots?

Butlerian, surely.

What profession do you have that made you a Luddite based on the current state of LLMs and AI?

I'm an artist, programmer and musician, and is no closer to being a Luddite today than five years ago, not sure why others would either. Anti-capitalist or Anti-fascist I'd understand, considering the state of the world and the current direction.

lol this. No one wants to admit this when it comes to explaining why AI adoption is slow

On the contrary; it is prominent to leverage the synergy of ontological orthogonalities to maximize a diverse approach.

3 to 4 years ago chat gpt2 wrote much more creative stories, its faults actually made interesting and absurd concoctions out of it's training material. Nowadays its just a machine for plagiarizing works and laundering copyright.

they probably used AI to answer the survey and those were hallucinated answers...