20 Minute AI Appraisals Are Coming

[Mile High Trout]

Artificial non intelligence. That's the new catch phrase.

New teacher article for higher education; 85% of students confess to using AI to write papers. (reddit is full of these idiots and they can't converse or write for a damn, but are good at standing up for AI easy street, or so they think. Reddit is among the only places you'll see how stupid AI users really are, it's a rare location they don't rely on their own AI.) So teacher says; If you use AI to complete the assignment, I'll use AI to grade it and will not adjust or allow grade correction revision or rework.

People whom use AI are not as bright as they think they are. They're dealing with coding peramiters and serious logical faults, lack of ethic.

The article writer, alongside anyone else whom believes AI process is a reasonable substitute for a human licensed appraiser, clearly is not qualified for this job, because they don't understand a damned thing about consumer protection. Bow to your new master, ask AI another question. Meet your new god. AI in lending is one big racket, a circumvention of all traditional oversight process. What's necessary for that to happen, is the ongoing conditioning to make people comfortable with T2 as their co worker. To lose all faith and bow to the new golden idol. Play with fire at your own risk.

 

[cashcatz]

Artificial non intelligence. That's the new catch phrase.

New teacher article for higher education; 85% of students confess to using AI to write papers. (reddit is full of these idiots and they can't converse or write for a damn, but are good at standing up for AI easy street, or so they think. Reddit is among the only places you'll see how stupid AI users really are, it's a rare location they don't rely on their own AI.) So teacher says; If you use AI to complete the assignment, I'll use AI to grade it and will not adjust or allow grade correction revision or rework.

People whom use AI are not as bright as they think they are. They're dealing with coding peramiters and serious logical faults, lack of ethic.

The article writer, alongside anyone else whom believes AI process is a reasonable substitute for a human licensed appraiser, clearly is not qualified for this job, because they don't understand a damned thing about consumer protection. Bow to your new master, ask AI another question. Meet your new god. AI in lending is one big racket, a circumvention of all traditional oversight process. What's necessary for that to happen, is the ongoing conditioning to make people comfortable with T2 as their co worker. To lose all faith and bow to the new golden idol. Play with fire at your own risk.

Just like with any tool since we learned how to rub two sticks together and create fire; it's how it's employed.

Nuclear power is good; radiation poisoning - not so much.

It's in the way that you use it:

 

[ucbruin]

"People whom use AI are not as bright as they think they are. They're dealing with coding peramiters and serious logical faults, lack of ethic."


It's 2025....
Get your head out of the "ethic's cloud"....
Ethics....
What a hoot & a holler....

 

[cashcatz]

"People whom use AI are not as bright as they think they are. They're dealing with coding peramiters and serious logical faults, lack of ethic."


It's 2025....
Get your head out of the "ethic's cloud"....
Ethics....
What a hoot & a holler....

Also, AIs generally spell parameter correctly

 

[Non Sequitur]

AI is happening much faster than years, but the point is valid:

 

[George Hatch]

We have AF members who are posting AI responses as if the AI is doing anything other than aggregating other previously developed opinions and concluding to the one conventional wisdom which is the most prevalent. If 6 writers are going in one direction and 1 writer is going the other way, the winner of the election will be the majority opinion, regardless of whether or not the majority was mostly wrong and the minority report was mostly right.

Most people seem to be using AI like a search engine. I am doing that, too. The difference is when I ask a search engine something they return a bunch of different responses for me to sift through. Google isn't picking one explanation out of the many as if that's the one that matters.

At least when we post an article in one of our discussions on this forum we usually attribute the information or explanation to its actual source. The AI responses don't do that, although I'm sure their responses can be configured that way. Which for the purposes of a discussion is fine insofar as we recognize the appeal to authority remains the same. As opposed to the appeal to reason. In that respect, deferring to the wisdom of "Chat-GPT" in lieu of working my own way through the material isn't any less of the appeal to authority than if I defer to the wisdom of Rachel Maddow or Ben Shapiro or any other talking head. If even. I'm still deferring to someone else's explanation instead of formulating or aggregating my own.

 

[Non Sequitur]

Not appraisal specific, but a really good discussion about AI in general:

 

[shrubberyvaluation]

We have AF members who are posting AI responses as if the AI is doing anything other than aggregating other previously developed opinions and concluding to the one conventional wisdom which is the most prevalent. If 6 writers are going in one direction and 1 writer is going the other way, the winner of the election will be the majority opinion, regardless of whether or not the majority was mostly wrong and the minority report was mostly right.

Most people seem to be using AI like a search engine. I am doing that, too. The difference is when I ask a search engine something they return a bunch of different responses for me to sift through. Google isn't picking one explanation out of the many as if that's the one that matters.

At least when we post an article in one of our discussions on this forum we usually attribute the information or explanation to its actual source. The AI responses don't do that, although I'm sure their responses can be configured that way. Which for the purposes of a discussion is fine insofar as we recognize the appeal to authority remains the same. As opposed to the appeal to reason. In that respect, deferring to the wisdom of "Chat-GPT" in lieu of working my own way through the material isn't any less of the appeal to authority than if I defer to the wisdom of Rachel Maddow or Ben Shapiro or any other talking head. If even. I'm still deferring to someone else's explanation instead of formulating or aggregating my own.

I do think "AI" is going to be used for propaganda purposes.

 

[George Hatch]

They're already doing deep fakes of various types. Some of which are already having harmful results. This article just showed up in my feed 5 minutes ago.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sextor...-it-down-act/?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

A teen died after being blackmailed with A.I.-generated nudes. His family is fighting for change​

 

[azbassman21]

The problem is you old heads never learned how to apply appraisal methods to all the new data since modern MLS.

If you think what you do doesn't have any value over automated processes then yes you should be worried.

This is what's caused our profession to be in jeopardy from the start. Failure to adapt to new methods. Also, Fannie Mae's forms and the ridiculous guidelines with comp photos when the data is readily available. There is too much wasted time. Changing the form via a 3rd party company who could actually get it done in a year, not 10, reducing the ridiculous time wasting requirements of taking comp photos and acting as a home inspector for FHA assignments, ridiculous AMC revisions, and appraisers actually adapting to time saving technologies, i.e. lasers measuring, phone apps, etc. This industry is antiquated unlike any other and we have failed to prove our worth.