When it comes to the overarching ideology of the techbros, "In Pursuit of the Metaverse" by Dr. Douglas Mark Haugen is a much better read than this encyclical. On the other hand, if he doesn't condemn Gaudium et Spes to the trashbin of history where it belongs, then I don't really care what he has to say.
Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
21–30 of 330 posts
Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#22Frank Herbert was prophetic.
Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point being that's the solution. I didn't say it is decentralised.
How is it possible to decentralize a technology that needs data centers the size of Manhattan? It doesn't seem like a reasonable solution. A better solution would be to just not have AI at all, outside of the few research roles where LLMs actually make sense.
Because it has extremely plausible uses beyond the example you gave.
More to the point it's trained on copyrighted material, so why entertain any use at all on that front if anything.
If it's trained on the world's information, give the world the model.
It doesn't need a tech company to pilfer everything and charge X if we're going to ignore the IP.
Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#24I believe the great problem of our age is deciding who controls technology. The technologists who create it believe they should control it, the people who use it are starting to believe they should control it and the governments who write the laws believe they should control it. And now the priests believe they should also play role. So is the next phase of "Democracy" electing who controls technology?
This is the question that led to the communist movement in the 19th century.
Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#25Frank Herbert was prophetic.
can you please elaborate on what you mean by this?
Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#26The interview with Thiel where Douthat asks him “You would prefer the human race to endure right?” And his response is 30 seconds of hemming&hawwing “well…” says it all about the VC bro class.
Enjoy Argentina bros.
Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#27When it comes to the overarching ideology of the techbros, "In Pursuit of the Metaverse" by Dr. Douglas Mark Haugen is a much better read than this encyclical. On the other hand, if he doesn't condemn Gaudium et Spes to the trashbin of history where it belongs, then I don't really care what he has to say.
Aside from the Jesus centered stuff what are the things in Gaudium et Spes that you find to be trash? (I only read a summary before asking)
Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#28Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're around the mark. Big tech has continuously eroded the idea of privacy and copyright and explains a lot of their market caps. Mitigating seemingly has devolved to trade wars and protectionism. The genie is out the bottle with AI though. So perhaps decentralisation of it puts us all on a new level playing field.
What decentralization? AI is more extremely centralized than any other technology.
Not really. Search engines are a tech so centralized only two of them exist in the west, Google and Bing. There are zero open source search engines of any usable quality. Whereas there are lots of models out there, some free to download.
Re: Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism
#30I believe the great problem of our age is deciding who controls technology. The technologists who create it believe they should control it, the people who use it are starting to believe they should control it and the governments who write the laws believe they should control it. And now the priests believe they should also play role. So is the next phase of "Democracy" electing who controls technology?
It's legitimately surprising how off the pace HN is when it comes to discussions of this type. You won't get useful thoughts on this around here.