• Home
  • Technology
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
  • World & Business
  • Science
  • Sports
  • AI
HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
  • HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
    • Home
    • Technology
    • Gaming
    • Entertainment
    • World & Business
    • Science
    • Sports
    • AI
    AI
    Reaction

    François Fleuret argues AI may force people to clarify who can understand what

    In two X posts, François Fleuret argues that interacting with AI may force people to clarify who can understand what. In a follow-up, he writes that the path forward is to rely on “rings of trust” and proposes a public register of AI model mistakes.

    FF
    2 Sources, 15h ago, first seen 15h ago

    TLDR

    In two X posts, François Fleuret argues that interacting with AI may force people to clarify who can understand what, either by providing more “intelligible paths” or by clarifying that “trust the AI bro” is the only option. In a follow-up, he writes that the path forward is to rely on “rings of trust” and proposes a public register of AI model mistakes.

    Combined views

    5.9K

    2 Sources, first seen 15h ago

    Combined views

    5.9K

    2 Sources, first seen 15h ago

    39 likes
    39 likes
    9 comments
    6 saves
    3 reposts

    François Fleuret argues in one X post that interaction with AI may force people to clarify who can understand what.

    He frames that as a choice between trying to provide “intelligible paths” and clarifying that “trust the AI bro” is the only option.

    In a follow-up post, Fleuret writes that “the only path forward when you operate with individuals smarter than you is to rely on rings of trust”.

    In the same post, he proposes “a public register of all models of AIs and records of mistakes / errors they have committed”.

    Together, the posts show Fleuret arguing that interacting with AI may force people to clarify who can understand what, while contrasting more intelligible paths with reliance on trust. His follow-up adds a more concrete proposal: public records for AI models and the mistakes tied to them.

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    Featured Source
    9 comments
    6 saves
    3 reposts

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    2 Sources

    @francoisfleuretHot take: interaction with AI will force us to clarify who can understand what, so that an effort can be done to provide us with "intelligible paths" or clarify that nope "trust the AI bro" is the only option for the stability of that new tokamak.15h

    2 Sources

    @francoisfleuretHot take: interaction with AI will force us to clarify who can understand what, so that an effort can be done to provide us with "intelligible paths" or clarify that nope "trust the AI bro" is the only option for the stability of that new tokamak.15h