I’m guessing it will be exactly like the internet. Changes everything and changes nothing.
lol absolutely not
I think it’ll be like social media
AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
121–130 of 309 posts
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#122Digital spreadsheets (excel, etc) have done much more to change the world than so-called "artificial intelligence," and on the current trajectory it's difficult to see that changing.
hah, just wait until everything you ever do online is moderated through an LLM and tell me that's not world changing
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you use non-constructive reasoning¹ then you can argue for basically any outcome & even convince yourself that it is inevitable. The basic example is as follows, there is no scientific or physical principle that can prevent the birth of someone much worse than Hitler & therefore if people keep having children one of those children will inevitably be someone who will cause unimaginable death & destruction. My recom…
Irrelevant but I like this pattern of using Gemini (or AI outputs in general) as sources. Please continue to do so and I encourage any readers to also adopt this pattern. I will also try to implement this pattern.
The sources are in the report. Gemini provides actual references for all the claims made. You'd know that if you actually looked but lack of intellectual rigor is expected when people are afraid of actually scrutinizing their beliefs of non-constructive inevitability.
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#124Okay, so AI isn’t exceptional, but I’m also not exceptional. I run on the same tech base as any old chimpanzee, but at one point our differences in degree turned into one of us remaining “normal” and the other burning the entire planet. Whether the particular current AI tech is it or not, I have yet to be convinced that the singularity is practically impossible, and as long as things develop in the opposite direction…
If you use non-constructive reasoning¹ then you can argue for basically any outcome & even convince yourself that it is inevitable. The basic example is as follows, there is no scientific or physical principle that can prevent the birth of someone much worse than Hitler & therefore if people keep having children one of those children will inevitably be someone who will cause unimaginable death & destruction. My recom…
I agree that the mere theoretical possibility isn’t sufficient for the argument, but you’re missing the much less refutable component: that the inevitability is actively driven by universal incentives of competition.
But as I alluded to earlier, we’re working towards plenty of other collapse scenarios, so who knows which we’ll realize first…
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#125I think the "calculator for words" analogy is a good one. It's imperfect since words are inherently ambiguous but then again so is certain forms of digital numbers (floating point anyone?). Through this lens it's way more normal
I think a better term is "word synthesizer"
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you use non-constructive reasoning¹ then you can argue for basically any outcome & even convince yourself that it is inevitable. The basic example is as follows, there is no scientific or physical principle that can prevent the birth of someone much worse than Hitler & therefore if people keep having children one of those children will inevitably be someone who will cause unimaginable death & destruction. My recom…
I agree that the mere theoretical possibility isn’t sufficient for the argument, but you’re missing the much less refutable component: that the inevitability is actively driven by universal incentives of competition. But as I alluded to earlier, we’re working towards plenty of other collapse scenarios, so who knows which we’ll realize first…
My current guess is ecological collapse & increasing frequency of system shocks & disasters. Basically Blade Runner 2049 + Children of Men type of outcome.
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Floating point numbers aren't ambiguous in the least. They behave by perfectly deterministic and reliable rules and follow a careful specification.
So are LLMs. Under the covers they are just deterministic matmul.
The purpose of floating point numbers it to provide a reliable, accurate, and precise implementation of fixed-precision arithmetic that is useful for scientific calculations and which has a large dynamic range, which is also capable of handling exceptional states (1/0, 0/0, overflow/underflow, etc) in a logical and predictable manner. In this sense, IEEE754 provides a careful and precise specification which has been implemented consistently on virtually every personal computer in use today.
LLMs are machine learning models used to encode and decode text or other-like data such that it is possible to efficiently do statistical estimation of long sequences of tokens in response to queries or other input. It is obvious that the behavior of LLMs is neither consistent nor standardized (and it's unclear whether this is even desirable---in the case of floating-point arithmetic, it certainly is). Because of the statistical nature of machine learning in general, it's also unclear to what extent any sort of guarantee could be made on the likelihoods of certain responses. So I am not sure it is possible to standardize and specify them along the lines of IEEE754.
The fact that a forward pass on a neural network is "just deterministic matmul" is not really relevant.
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Irrelevant but I like this pattern of using Gemini (or AI outputs in general) as sources. Please continue to do so and I encourage any readers to also adopt this pattern. I will also try to implement this pattern.
The sources are in the report. Gemini provides actual references for all the claims made. You'd know that if you actually looked but lack of intellectual rigor is expected when people are afraid of actually scrutinizing their beliefs of non-constructive inevitability.
maybe you misread the post you‘re answering to here or are you suspecting sarcasm? the poster commended your usage of the footnote with the gemini convo as far as i can tell?
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aircraft don't fly like birds, submarines don't swim like fish and AIs aren't going to think like a human.
Do you need to "think like a human" to think? Is it only thinking if you do it with a meat brain?
Is the substrate important? If you made an accurate model of a human brain in software, in silicon or using water pipes and valves, would it be able to tnink? Would it be conscious? I have no idea.
Re: AI might yet follow the path of previous technological revolutions
#130If you make something cheap, then it will be cheap.
LLMs may set a record for time between specialized/luxury goods and commodity.
There may be a price floor, but it's not very high.
In My Opinion.
---
Ever think about why restaurants pay someone to wash the dishes?
In my house, I have a machine that does that.
In a restaurant, the machine is too slow, and not compatible with the rest of the system of the restaurant.
Until we hit singularity, AI has to be compatible with the rest of the system.