Screenshot of the AI ** clip released by OpenAI. Screenshot of the network.
Text |Malvern.
After the well-known blogger Li Yizhou was questioned about selling courses with the concept of AI, the related phenomenon attracted widespread attention.
According to an investigation by the Beijing News, shortly after OpenAI launched the Wensheng large model Sora, a large number of speculators selling related "tutorials" appeared on short** and e-commerce platforms. Most of the content provided by these paid courses is public, the quality is worrying, and there is a suspicion of falsely advertising "internal beta quotas" to cut leeks.
Technological breakthroughs related to artificial intelligence have been the most eye-catching focus of global science and technology in recent years. In the context of the world's first-class enterprises, enterprises and scientific research institutions rushing to invest in research and development, many members of the public can only glimpse the progress from the occasional products. So, this also leaves an opportunity for marketers to take advantage of.
Although many large models have been opened to the public at home and abroad, the threshold for the use of these large models is still relatively high so far. In addition, most of these large models are still in the testing and training stage and have not been applied on a large scale in specific scenarios.
For example, before the Wensheng ** large model SORA, the large model of the Wensheng diagram has been more popular. However, to this day, the Wensheng diagram model has not been widely used in various fields.
The technology is still being explored and iterated, and the landing application is still mainly based on display and test training. It is not difficult to imagine that the quality of the content of the relevant courses that dare to publicly promise the effectiveness at this stage must be worrying. Therefore, the current courses on artificial intelligence concepts aimed at the general public are more or less suspected of "excessive marketing" or even "false marketing".
In the case that the application scenarios and modes of artificial intelligence have not yet been determined, how ordinary people will use artificial intelligence is an unresolved topic in the industry. Therefore, Li Yizhou's courses will inevitably face many questions.
In essence, these sales class operators are just using hot concepts to exploit the gap in public perception and information, and create anxiety to sell content. The quality of the course itself and whether the concept is implemented or not are not important in the chain of cutting leeks, they are just using the cover of hot concepts to piece together a set of content to sell.
In the Beijing News report, some "lecturers" even bluntly said that technicians who understand AI may not be able to make money through AI, because there is a certain degree of difficulty in the implementation of AI, but people who do not understand AI technology can still make money by selling courses.
No ** content, only selling anxiety, and low-quality content and exaggerated anxiety will overdraft the public's trust in technology in advance. This is the fundamental reason why these school sales and marketing parties have aroused public ridicule.
The development and popularization of technology has its own basic laws. At present, the reason why artificial intelligence has not been rapidly popularized and applied is that the technology itself is still being optimized and iterative, and it does not yet have the conditions to quickly become a productivity tool. On the other hand, on the basis of imperfect technology, developers can only run in small steps and gradually open up application scenarios.
While technology developers remain cautious, the marketing party uses the prudence of scientific research to preempt and attract ordinary users with low-quality content and gimmicky concepts. This is not only an injustice to scientific researchers, but also a long-term harm to users.
Imagine that ordinary users who originally bought courses for the goal of "experiencing new production tools" or "learning new skills" are likely to reject the concept itself when they find that they have only been cut leeks or find that "artificial intelligence is nothing more than that". This will hurt both the future application of artificial intelligence and the long-term cognitive ability of these users.
In addition, in some marketing shorts**, many course sellers even deliberately fabricate the opposition between technology and people, so as to create more anxiety. For example, "people are going to be replaced by artificial intelligence" and "which professions are being eliminated by artificial intelligence" and so on. These contents exaggerate the opposition between artificial intelligence and human beings, while ignoring the current development direction of the artificial intelligence industry, which is to improve production efficiency to liberate the creativity of individual human beings. In the long run, these irresponsible, anxiety-mongering rhetoric is also tearing apart the social consensus on technological progress.
It is worth noting that people's current skepticism and ridicule of "AI live streaming of courses" also stems partly from long-term anxiety about the uneven progress of science and technology. In the case of artificial intelligence entering a new round of global competition, how to solve the false information constantly created by these porcelain marketers has also become a new social governance problem. At this time, the more we need to encourage real science popularization, apply it cautiously, and reward scientific and technological innovators, instead of letting anxiety sellers make undue profits and make noise.
Written by Malvern (**person).
Edited by Bruce Ma.
Proofread by Diyan Chen.
Duty Editor: Wang Ke.
Read testimonials. In the spring, 1.4 billion wishes grow upwards |Chinese New Year Editorial.
Weather news is not a "trifle".
* Why the blogger's "experience post" became a "leek harvester".
Spring Festival Gala, do you watch?
Be vigilant against the "spring catastrophe" of public opinion