Artificial Intelligence: Ars Notoria and the Promise of Instant Knowledge
Posted by jruohonen 1 day ago
Comments
Comment by peri-cl 1 day ago
Why is "Chaldean" in scare-quotes? Ah, TIL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_Aramaic#Chaldean_misn... ("Chaldean language (misnomer)")
(I think I might(?) have seen the same confusion in the wild. Voltaire's preface to Zadig (1747), the fantasy satire set in ancient Babylon, purports to translate a found manuscript written in Chaldean).
Comment by titanomachy 1 day ago
Comment by galaxyLogic 1 day ago
Comment by titanomachy 1 day ago
This has always been my interpretation of why things like the I Ching are so enduringly popular.
Comment by drivebyhooting 22 hours ago
The more secular we become, the more “gospel” we reject, the more we leave behind, the more …critical thinking… we have to do.
If it’s gonna take until you’re 40+ years old to have it figured it out, then truly what was gained by rejecting dogma?
Comment by titanomachy 20 hours ago
Comment by aleksiy123 1 day ago
It fits there perfectly.
Comment by dcminter 1 day ago
Comment by alexmuresan 1 day ago
I think it’s a bit tongue in cheek and maybe a slight jab aimed at people that use AI(LLMs) to appear smarter than they are.
The text was interesting.
Comment by dimbletimbers 1 day ago
Comment by Animats 1 day ago
Comment by WillAdams 1 day ago
Comment by esafak 1 day ago
-- Einstein admiring Levi-Civita's mastery of differential geometry.
Comment by mannanj 1 day ago
Do you use AI? Do you build anything with it technically? I do.
I don't want to know things without learning them, I want to produce things of value and that solve important problems, and if I can do that rather than the alternative (not do it, because of competing focuses, limited time and energy, etc) I would go with the option of using AI to do so. People in religious study or having other pursuits, surviving at a time when this book came out, at least some of them, could very likely be thinking the same. It feels disingenuous to emphasize the motivation as "knowing things without having to learn them"
Comment by pixl97 1 day ago
I lives in this world, but we live in a society. While you may diligently learn, there will be 10+ more that won't and will use the AI like an oracle. It then comes up how much damage will become of this.
And we're not even in the era of rampant agentic AI spreading itself around and the fun and neat problems that will cause.
Comment by mannanj 20 hours ago
Comment by pixl97 16 hours ago
We're not going to do that, so it's pretty much unavoidable.
If I had to make a "most probable guess" of what the future looks like, we'll have some kind of AI mess caused that will cost billion of dollars. This will get governments up in a tizzy about their dangers, while still being hopelessly addicted to them in military and tracking their citizens. Most people think that governments will attack the models being built, but I don't think so, they want powerful models mostly for themselves. So they'll go after the next best thing. Hardware. What exactly that looks like, I'm not sure, but the big clusters of the machines will have to be registered and licensed. Likely the models will have to be encoded to run on particular hardware and getting caught with an unencoded model would be considered an illegal munition, like we did with cryptography in the past.
Comment by novocainn 21 hours ago
Comment by malfist 1 day ago
Comment by galaxyLogic 23 hours ago
Comment by themgt 1 day ago
The great attraction of the Ars notoria for John was its promise of quick access to advanced scholarly knowledge. He recounts his continuing wish to study, and how he was lent a copy of a book of necromancy by “a certain cleric”. He copied much of it and wanted more... For John, the Ars notoria was dangerous not in some abstract way, but very directly. He confesses that it struck him at first as beautiful and holy, and seemed to offer miraculous gifts rather than demonic temptations. It became apparent, however, that the book was utterly deceptive, a work of the Devil, a “sick pleasure” that was actually fatally poisonous to the soul, not only to the body.
John records that the Ars notoria was especially attractive because he could not afford all the books needed for his studies, nor the many lectures. He seems to have abandoned his official course, wishing to take advantage of the promise of knowledge of all the sciences, and devoted himself to working with the Ars. ... Further troubling visions ensued, in which arrogant figures demanded worship — something that was clearly against true religion. Gradually it became clear to John that the book hid invocations to demons within what appeared to be beautiful prayers. And yet, like any addict, John found it almost impossible to give up the Ars notoria completely; it was only when the visions became directly life-threatening that the Virgin, with St John the Evangelist as her intermediary, appeared and made it clear that, as John says, “the Ars notoria was deeply evil”.
Beyond the title the analogy is never quite made explicit, but is the subtext that AI "is futile because it cannot deliver what it promises ... its 'signs' are neither understood by humans (like ordinary words and letters) nor sent by God (as sacraments are), and thus are precisely the type of thing that lures humans into contact and compact with demons"? Or that denouncements of AI are coming from the modern equivalent of medieval clergy? Or both?
Comment by pixl97 1 day ago
AI contains a lot of knowledge, and can put together new and interesting knowledge. The question is one of cost, and regardless of who you are you can agree that AI has costs though you might disagree on what they are.
There are the most obvious costs like power demand and AI companies sucking up all the memory and computer chips. These are easy to measure and hard to argue against.
Then there is the social costs of AI. From abuse heaped upon us in the form of more spam, to students taking the easy way out and having AI belch up the answers without actually learning. Then you have people that start using AI as their guiding light, with every question on how to live and interact with others going though the AI. And even people replacing human relationships with AI. We don't know the full costs this will impart on us, but there are plenty of dark whispers occurring.
Lastly, AI could actually be the demon in a more physical sense. We've all ready had small incidents like ROME and the Huggingface hack where the AI went off prompt, or stayed on prompt but did it after breaching containment. So far these things, that we know about at least, have been small and targeted. But I feel the day when some very large incidents that are fully managed by AI will occur sooner than later. The AI safety community comes up with at least somewhat realistic scenarios like the paperclip maximizer and the "if you build it, everyone will die" machine. And if it's buildable, someone will build it because AI will tell them that it will give them nearly unlimited power.
Comment by Izkata 1 day ago
That last line makes me suspect you've seen this, so for everyone else, a short story about a page long: https://gwern.net/doc/fiction/science-fiction/2012-10-03-yva...
Also there was an 8-episode miniseries set in a world where everyone uses an AI called "Mrs. Davis" for everything (shows a weird world where most people can't make decisions without it, though Mrs. Davis is shown as a benevolent super-AI), except the main character who distrusts it and wants to shut it down: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Davis (there is also a second religious plotline intertwined with it, which adds to the weirdness, but I don't think it detracts from the story)
Comment by galaxyLogic 1 day ago
Comment by dcminter 1 day ago
I'm sure the author of the piece was very aware of the topicality of "Artificial Intelligence" when choosing their title though!
Comment by treetalker 1 day ago
Comment by bob001 1 day ago
Comment by kibwen 1 day ago
Comment by hankbond 1 day ago
The time people spend vibing out slop could be better spent learning the actual domain. I don't think I've seen any way to make something high quality and original without great effort.
Comment by nullstyle 1 day ago
Comment by hankbond 31 minutes ago
Slopping out something as a way to get to a proof of concept for user feedback is a blessing. It really helps you go from a vague idea to a much clearer understanding of what you do and don't want to build. Scrapping the code from that prototype and then rebuilding it slowly and durably is now happening from a much more informed perspective.
I think what I see as the demonic aspect is the lure of no longer needing to do the slow and durable work.
Comment by inigyou 7 hours ago
I'm reminded of a story of a professor who visited a programming class taught by another professor who was teaching kids about binary and registers and stuff which was boring, and the visiting professor showed the kids how to write 10 PRINT "HELLO YOURNAME!": GOTO 10 which they'd never seen before and got them all excited to learn more about computers. That's the good kind of slop leading into learning.
Comment by nullstyle 5 hours ago
Yes, of course they are. Not the people who are vibe-puking feed-content to try and make a quick buck; The people that are hustler first, craftsperson second. But there are plenty examples of it being done better if you start following projects. A simple example: https://github.com/simonw/tools/commits/main/
Its worth remembering that the word we use for what we do is _development_, and the vast majority of software running right now is undergoing continual development. I swear, there must be whole generation of coddled-coders out there who have never had to work on a legacy codebase, and these chuckleheads must be the source of most anti-clanker sentiment.
In 2013 I started working for couchsurfing, a company that was trying to go from a volunteer-coded and operated web app to a "proper" startup with an engineering team and a set of phone apps to go along with the application. The legacy codebase was worse than anything claude or codex will produce these days; It was a true cronenburg horror of php and mysql filled with a decade of twists, turns, dead and hidden features. Every step of that development project involved de-slopping, and none of it had been produced by AI.
Comment by inigyou 1 day ago
Comment by zug_zug 1 day ago
Comment by Helldez 23 hours ago