If you’ve watched any Olympics coverage this week, you’ve likely been confronted with an ad for Google’s Gemini AI called “Dear Sydney.” In it, a proud father seeks help writing a letter on behalf of his daughter, who is an aspiring runner and superfan of world-record-holding hurdler Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone.
“I’m pretty good with words, but this has to be just right,” the father intones before asking Gemini to “Help my daughter write a letter telling Sydney how inspiring she is…” Gemini dutifully responds with a draft letter in which the LLM tells the runner, on behalf of the daughter, that she wants to be “just like you.”
I think the most offensive thing about the ad is what it implies about the kinds of human tasks Google sees AI replacing. Rather than using LLMs to automate tedious busywork or difficult research questions, “Dear Sydney” presents a world where Gemini can help us offload a heartwarming shared moment of connection with our children.
Inserting Gemini into a child’s heartfelt request for parental help makes it seem like the parent in question is offloading their responsibilities to a computer in the coldest, most sterile way possible. More than that, it comes across as an attempt to avoid an opportunity to bond with a child over a shared interest in a creative way.
“Dear Sydney” presents a world where Gemini can help us offload a heartwarming shared moment of connection with our children.
This is the problem I’ve had with the LLM announcements when they first came out. One of their favorite examples is writing a Thank You note.
The whole point of a Thank You note is that you didn’t have to write it, but you took time out of your day anyways to find your own words to thank someone.
Sincerity is a foreign concept to MBAs, VCs, and anyone who thinks they’re on a business Grind Set. They view the world as a game and interpersonal relationships as a game mechanic.
Ugh, who has time for that? I need all of my waking hours to be devoted to increasing work productivity and consuming products. Computers can feel my pesky feelings for me now.
Although I will use it to write resumes and cover letters when applying to jobs from now on. They use AI to weed out resumes. I figure the only way to beat that system is to use it against itself.
As an engineering manager, I’ve already received AI cover letters. Don’t do that. They suck. They get “round filed” faster than no cover letter at all. It’s insulting.
(Realistically if I couldn’t tell the difference then it would be fine, but right now it’s so fucking obvious.)
But apparently you’re not using AI to filter the resumes. A huge number of companies are. 42% as of this year.
https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240214-ai-recruiting-hiring-software-bias-discrimination
Companies like Google don’t understand how advanced AI algorithms work. They can sort of represent things like emotions by encoding relationships between high level concepts and trying to relate things together using logic.
This usually just means they’ll echo the emotions of whomever gave them input and amplify them to make some form of art, though.
People with power at Google are often very hateful people who will say hurtful things to each other, especially about concepts like money or death.
Robot, experience this dramatic irony for me!
reminds me of that bear from inside job
So in the spring I got a letter from a student telling me how much they appreciate me as a teacher. At the time I was going through some s***. Still am frankly. So it meant a lot to me.That was such a nice letter.
I read it again the next day and realized it was too perfect. Some of the phrasing just didn’t make sense for a high school student. Some of the punctuation.
I have no doubt the student was sincere in their appreciation for me, But once I realized what they had done It cheapened those happy feelings. Blah.
You should’ve asked Gemini what to feel about it and how to response…
That’s the problem with how they are doing it, everyone seems to want AI to do everything, everywhere.
It is now getting on my own nerves, because more and more customers want to have somehow AI integrated in their websites, even when they don’t have a use for it.
I’m curious, if they had gone to their parent, gave them the same info, and come to the same message… would it have been less cheap feeling?
And do you know that isn’t the case? “Hey mom, I’m trying to write something nice to my teacher, this is what I have but it feels weird can you make a suggestion?” Is a perfectly reasonable thing to have happened.
I think there’s a different amount of effort involved in the two scenarios and that does matter. In your example, the kid has already drafted the letter and adding in a parent will make it take longer and involve more effort. I think the assumption is they didn’t go to AI with a draft letter but had it spit one out with a much easier to create prompt.
… But why did it cheapen it when they’re the one that sent it to you? Because someone helped them write it, somehow the meaning is meaningless?
That seems positively callous in the worst possible way.
It’s needless fear mongering because it doesn’t count because of arbitrary reason since it’s not how we used to do things in the good old days.
No encyclopedia references… No using the internet… No using Wikipedia… No quoting since language and experience isn’t somehow shared and built on the shoulders of the previous generations with LLMs being the equivalent of a literal human reference dictionary that people want to say but can’t recall themselves or simply want to save time in a world where time is more precious than almost anything lol.
The only reason anyone shouldn’t like AI is due to the power draw. And nearly every AI company is investing more in renewables than anyone everyone else while pretending like data centers are the bane of existence while they write on Lemmy watching YouTube and playing an online game lol.
David Joyner in his article On Artificial Intelligence and Authenticity gives an excellent example on how AI can cheapen the meaning of the gift: the thought and effort that goes into it.
In the opening synchronous meeting for one such class this semester, I was asked about this policy: if the work itself is the same, what does it matter whether it came from AI or not? I explained my thoughts with an analogy: imagine you have an assistant, whether that is an executive assistant at work or a family assistant at home or anyone else whose professional role is helping you with your role. Then, imagine your child’s (or spouse’s, I actually can’t remember which example I used in class) birthday is coming up. You could go out and shop for a present yourself, but you’re busy, so you ask this assistant to go pick out something. If your child found out that your assistant picked out the gift instead of you, would we consider it reasonable for them to be disappointed, even if the gift itself is identical to the one you would have purchased?
My class (those that spoke up, at least) generally agreed yes, it would be reasonable to expect the child to be disappointed: the gift is intended to represent more than just its inherent usefulness and value, but also the thought and effort that went into obtaining it. I continued the analogy by asking: now imagine if the gift was instead a prize selected for an employee-of-the-month sort of program. Would it be as disappointing for the assistant to buy it in that case? Likely not: in that situation, the gift’s value is more direct.
The assistant parallel is an interesting one, and I think that comes out in how I use LLMs as well. I’d never ask an assistant to both choose and get a present for someone; but I could see myself asking them to buy a gift I’d chosen. Or maybe even do some research on a particular kind of gift (as an example, looking through my gift ideas list I have “lightweight step stool” for a family member. I’d love to outsource the research to come up with a few examples of what’s on the market, then choose from those.). The idea is mine, the ultimate decision would be mine, but some of the busy work to get there was outsourced.
Last year I also wrote thank you letters to everyone on my team for Associate Appreciation Day with the help of an LLM. I’m obsessive about my writing, and I know if I’d done that activity from scratch, it would have easily taken me 4 hours. I cut it down to about 1.5hrs by starting with a prompt like, “Write an appreciation note in first person to an associate who…” then provided a bulleted list of accomplishments of theirs. It provided a first draft and I modified greatly from there, bouncing things off the LLM for support.
One associate was underperforming, and I had the LLM help me be “less effusive” and to “praise her effort” more than her results so I wasn’t sending a message that conflicted with her recent review. I would have spent hours finding the right ways of doing that on my own, but it got me there in a couple exchanges. It also helped me find synonyms.
In the end, the note was so heavily edited by me that it was in my voice. And as I said, it still took me ~1.5 hours to do for just the three people who reported to me at the time. So, like in the gift-giving example, the idea was mine, the choice was mine, but I outsourced some of the drafting and editing busy work.
IMO, LLMs are best when used to simplify or support you doing a task, not to replace you doing them.
This is exactly how I view LLMs and have used them before.
These people in these scenarios aren’t going ‘Amazon buy my gf a gift she likes.’
They’re going, please write a letter to my professor thanking them for their help and all they’ve done for me in biology.
I don’t know of anyone who trusts AI enough to just carte blanche fire off emails immediately after getting prompts back either.
The fear and cheapening of AI is the same fear and cheapening as every other advancement in technology.
-
It’s not a a real conversation unless you talk face to face like a man
say it in a groupwrite it on parchment and inkpen and papertypewritertelegramphonecalltext messagefaxemail. E: rip strikethroughs? -
It’s not a real paper if it’s a meta analysis.
-
It’s not it’s not it’s not.
All for arbitrary reasons that people have used to offset mundane garden levels of tedium or just outright ableist in some circumstances.
People also seriously overestimate their ability to detect AI writing or even pictures. That dude may very well have gotten a sincere letter without AI but they’ve already set it in their mind that the student wrote it with AI as if they know this student so well from 10 written assignments they probably don’t care about to 1 potentially sincerely written statement to them.
If people like that think it cheapens the value, that’s on them. People go on and on about removing pointless platitudes and dumb culturally ingrained shit but then clutch their pearls the moment one person toes outside the in-group.
It just feels so silly to me.
IT’S NOT ART UNLESS IT’S OIL ON CANVAS levels of dumb.
It’s not altruistic/good-natured unless you don’t benefit from it in any way and feel no emotion by doing it! You can’t help the homeless unless you follow the rules! You can’t give them money if you record it.
In the end, they still got that money. But somehow it devalues it because instead of raising two people up higher, you only raised one? It’s foolishness.
People also seriously overestimate other’s abilities and cheapen what their time is worth all the damn time.
-
That’s not fan mail. That’s spam.
I said all these things to my partner when I saw the ad as well.
I’ve spent more time helping my kid write Steam reviews of the games they’re playing than this Dad did on writing a letter to his daughter’s hero.
Simple as. Don’t be surprised when the kid puts you in a crappy home to afford more Gemini credit or whatever.
Well, some parents sincerely think they give more love by buying some new shiny thing, or, say, using an LLM to write a letter, than they do by just talking.
Imagine a man, autistic but in denial (“I’M NORMAL”) with constant imitation who can’t say a word without looking like a broken toy with clearly fake emotions and refusing to understand that this is not what one does when they show love. When said how that looks they just try harder at imitation or get furious. They don’t understand that sincere emotions do not require effort. If you’re autistic, yours look differently. But if you’re autistic, but terribly afraid of being “not normal” (grown in ex-USSR backwater working-class environment), you won’t accept the possibility and will just try harder to act. That’d be my dad (LLM’s didn’t exist back then, but).
It’s tragic, not necessarily about putting less effort.
And this works for any pain people might try to cover with some technological perceived miracle. Which is why such things are poison which does get inhaled by some even now.
The people making these ads can’t fathom anything past pure efficiency. It’s what their entire job revolves around, efficiently using corporate resources to maximize the amount of people using or paying for a product.
Sure, I would like to be more efficient when writing, but that doesn’t mean writing the whole letter for me, it means giving me pointers on how to start it, things to emphasize, or how to reword something that doesn’t sound quite right, so I don’t spend 10 minutes staring at an email wondering if the way I worded it will be taken the wrong way.
AI is a tool, it is not a replacement for humans. Trying to replace true human interaction with an LLM is like trying to replace an experienced person’s job with a freshly hired intern with no experience. Sure, they can technically do the job, but they won’t do it well. It’s only a benefit when the intern works with the existing knowledgeable individuals in the field to do better work.
If we try to use AI to replace the entire process, we just end up with this:
That flowchart example is idiotic but I love it. The formal cover letter in between is more idiotic. It would be cool if we could collectively agree to just send “I’d like this job” instead of all the bullshit.
A lot of what we do as a society is redundant, but I do think fully written emails or cover letters have merit (even if it’s the same template replicated for multiple applications,)
It helps the reviewer understand if you’re articulate with your speech, gives them additional context to your resume, and lets them better match applicants with their current work environment.
That said, a lot of the process is still redundant anyways, and considering many hiring processes are now entirely automated, a more concise, standardized method of providing the same information would likely be more manageable and efficient for most people.
But, you and everyone else would just say “I want this job” but they want the best person for the job. Putting up with bullshit is invariably going to be part of the job.
They can compare my resume with the other applicants’. I don’t mind.
Okay. I’m a transhumanist. I like AI, automation, and the abolishment of involuntary labor as well as obligatory adversity. Even I thought this ad was super fucking creepy. How the fuck do you justify sending your daughter an auto-generated letter? Now, not only do you not care enough to do it yourself, you’re lying to her about it.
If i look around me, the people have stopped caring and been lying about it for years.
Either Google knows it’s audience, or the ad was sent to the wrong crowd.
Once you realize that everyone that works in marketing is a soulless demon, the world starts to make a lot more sense.
Let’s say that there is a single player MMO where all the other players are played by AI, but it is done so well that you can’t really see the difference from real-human MMO players.
Would you play this? I would not. The fact that there is a human on the other side is important, even though it does not make any practical difference. Same with birthday wishes - that’s way Facebook did not automate “Happy birthday!” even though it could.
Would you upload your personal data and voice to Open AI for it to make a a birthday wishes call to your mom? So convinient! She won’t know the difference, and you get a 5 bulletpoint summary afterwards! Such a hellscape.
I want an MMO where 90+% of the “players”, are AI.
5% of the players are idk, “cylons” or vampires, or “outlaws” or whatever, and they have to hide among the townspeople. They need to act like AI. They need to think like AI. But they have objectives to destroy the ship, or gather an army of vampire spawn, or rob the bank, or whatever. To do this, they need to look like AI. They need to act like AI. They need to think like AI.
5% of the players are the “heroes” or “main characters” or “vampire hunters” or whatever. They are outed but have bonus powers. They have to route out the vampires or cylons or outlaws; whatever.
Basically a giant online game of mafia. Give the baddies special powers, give the heroes special powers. Weapons, armors, disguises, leveling, etc… etc… basic game mechanics.
But ultimately its a giant game of mafia using the AI as fog of war.
I’d play the shit outta that
After suggesting it and thinking about this a bit further.
You could probably hack together a text version of this that works on lemmy.
Westworld vibes
There was an MMO that was single player, DotHack. It has its fans.
the game isn’t tricking you though, and it’s structured like a regular RPG or it would take 100 hours to get to the ending doing pointless grinding, but you get there just by following the plot.
That was more a MMO themed normal JRPG. It had a central plot focused on the main cast specifically that played out in the scenario of an MMO, with very scripted dialog and sequence of events.
Would you play this? I would not.
Not only will people play it, they will play it in droves because at the end of the day, people are fluid, and fluid flows in predictable patterns.
You and I may be offended at the very idea of playing a game surrounded by fake people acting real, but for the average kid growing up in a world where reality is already a tenuous concept online, it will just be another strange experience in a growing list, and it might be really fun because of the things a game can do with complete control over the population of the “MMO.”
Would you upload your personal data and voice to Open AI for it to make a a birthday wishes call to your mom?
Not in a million years. The next generation will though, they won’t see any issue with it.
Unless something radically falls apart and makes people spurn electronic media entirely, some great Butlerian Jihad of the 21st century, we are going to see things get a LOT worse before they get better.
Not in a million years. The next generation will though, they won’t see any issue with it.
I guess they will anwser such calls with AI to get a summary anyway…
Great points overall. I guess previous generations thought that a hand-written letter cant be replaced by a digital one, yet here we are.
Shit, online guides in MMOs are bad enough. “why aren’t you following the meta” “you should be using this item and doing this build” These things basically make people bots. Having actual bots might be better.
It’s like the South Park episode about using chatgpt to message their SO
Was kinda suprised I forgot about this one lol. Such a great episode.
Let’s change the like button on youtube videos into an AI assistant that writes a three page email of thanks to the creator whenever it is pressed.
Let’s burn down the Amazon to do it.
Reminds me of the movie Her, where all kinds of heartfelt letters were outsourced to professional agencies.
I agree. This ad was immediately disgusting, cringy, and deflated my already floundering hope for humanity. Google sucks.
Google is the yahoo of 2000
The obvious missing element is another AI on Sydney’s end to summarize all the fan mail into a one-number sentiment score. At that point we can eliminate both the AIs and the mental effort, and just send each other single numbers via an ad-sponsored Google service.
Which they will unceremoniously murder after it fails to get enough traction in a month after launch.
Hey, my buddy’s work is already doing that! Management no longer has any idea what the company does, but they know how often you click. It boils down to a decimal number, which is what they really need. Higher numbers are better.
