121–130 of 694 posts
Humans have been successfully using violence for conflict-resolution for tens of thousands of years. We’ll be fine, it’s not our first rodeo.
Successfully ? Maybe the OG survivor bias here..
Anyone pish poshing war should go fight in one, and then let me know their opinions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iran killed 10 times more during protests without using AI. So AI is a clear improvement.
There is 0 evidence that many people died. Let’s not parrot that media propaganda.
Iran has admitted outright to 6k deaths, by the way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If ai benefitted everyone and not just the billionaires we would be viewing it differently.
That's a truism. But it ignores The Iron Law of Oligarchy, Pareto Principle, and dozens more that remind us that power tends towards centralization. It's currently fashionable to call out the billionaires, but if you removed them, they'd just be replaced by corrupt government officials, or something else. That's not to say we should just throw up our hands and accept every social injustice. But IMHO we shouldn't go a…
A lot of the magic of LLMs, I think, has been tarnished by these CEOs and other FAANG companies. It might have been a far more interesting world if they didn't bring "AI" or "AGI" into the conversation in such a politicized way.
When most engineers and Marvel fans watched Tony Stark in Avengers collaborating with Jarvis they thought of Jarvis like "an AI with Google's knowledge where I can interact with him". It's true that we're close to that level interaction. However, the ultimate goal is to get as much as possible automated on Jarvis, to the point where Tony Stark is not needed or Tony Stark can be replaced by anyone with a mouth.
In this example, Jarvis isn't the goal but a checkpoint. The goal is a genie, providing software and research to anyone who is loaded with money, and knows how to rub the metaphorical lamp the right way.
> But this is not the way. This is how things devolve into chaos. Meanwhile https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-many-people-ha... > U.S.-based rights group HRANA said 3,636 people have been killed since the war erupted. It said 1,701 of those were civilians, including at least 254 children. (Mentioning this specifically because we know the DoD is using AI)
Iran killed 10 times more during protests without using AI. So AI is a clear improvement.
The worst part is that AI's first casualties are jobs that no one really asked to kill. AI is killing writing, music, art, and coding. I've done all of these voluntarily because I simply enjoyed them Meanwhile the parts of my existence that I actually hate - dealing with customer support, handling government forms, dealing with taxes - is far from being automated by AI Look at Suno. Fantastic tool, but where was the…
But recorded music was a crisis. And it did tempt a lot of people into supporting fabulously abusable, rich-enriching "intellectual property" law as a means of financing art.
Rich people are lobbying to capitalize on this crisis as well.
I eagerly await the Butlerian Jihad
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iran killed 10 times more during protests without using AI. So AI is a clear improvement.
There is 0 evidence that many people died. Let’s not parrot that media propaganda.
or just arguing over 20K,30K,50k?
Just want to clarify. Since some people argue Covid never happened, and some just argue the total deaths wasn't really that high.
There is a sliding scale between "I sound like a raving crazy person", and "i'm just splitting hairs."
> But this is not the way. This is how things devolve into chaos. Meanwhile https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-many-people-ha... > U.S.-based rights group HRANA said 3,636 people have been killed since the war erupted. It said 1,701 of those were civilians, including at least 254 children. (Mentioning this specifically because we know the DoD is using AI)
Iran killed 10 times more during protests without using AI. So AI is a clear improvement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not complicated. Just tax the corporations and billionaires a fair share and setup UBI.
It is very much so complicated though. The conversations about UBI in the internet has been around since I’ve been online. And since then, there hasn’t been a single large scale test of the system to see if it can be compatible with the current version of capitalism that’s ran in the most of the world. Even if I support UBI morally, there isn’t even local appetite for it, yet alone global one. And you’ll run into qui…
"Compatible with current version of captialism" -- the whole point of UBI is to create a new form of capitalism