Earlier quoted context omitted.
The isolation produced by centering our urban and suburban design around cars is pronounced. It cannot be understated how much damage cars have done to our sense of connectedness, community, walkability, and health.
And yet, watch all these consumers deciding they want something different from what you're proclaiming is better for them.
Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
481–490 of 524 posts
Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#482Earlier quoted context omitted.
The first time an AI goes rogue, figures out subterfuge, blackmails a human to do its real-world bidding, will be a defining moment.
Turn it off at the wall, done. next doomsday scenario please
Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#483Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies game benchmarks, but sure they are better than nothing.
I mean you wanted something objective, and they are. I don’t know why you’re being dismissive of them, they’re a huge element of what drives model development forward. These companies aren’t just making stuff up, they really do want to improve the models, and the models really are improving.
I’m aware of multiple cases of benchmark cheating/“optimization”. So, taking benchmarks a face value seems laughable.
Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
> an incentive to make their technology seem transformative and powerful I have no frame of reference to process this. Humans species perhaps 300,000 years, we are essentially the same. Transistor, 79 years, explosive growth in numbers and power. Integrated circuit, 68 years, explosive growth in numbers and power. "Attention is all you need", 9 years. ChatGPT, 4 years, explosive growth in instances and power. Humans…
Agree with most of this, it's well articulated and captures how we react to change. However - 'Humans species perhaps 300,000 years, we are essentially the same' is an enormous misconception. That fact that we lack gross anatomical changes during this period, ignores everything we now know about punctuated equilibrium and rapid evolution. It's highly probably we've had an enormous number of evolved psychological chan…
It would be interesting to know how much we changed cognitively since our species bifurcated, and also since civilization scaled up social density.
Relative to the discussion, AI tech is progressing in time frames that are a fraction of a human generation. So we are at a complete standstill in that context.
Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#485Earlier quoted context omitted.
> To be honest, I don't believe it is a any more crazy believe than all of the other religions. The only way anyone can make a blanket statement like that and put "all religions" on equal epistemic footing is through ignorance of their deep differences. Even the word "religion" as commonly used today is relativistic by assumption , which is likely the source of how we commonly perceive "religion". A consequence of th…
"The only way anyone can make a blanket statement like that and put "all religions" on equal epistemic footing " All religion is based on superstitious believes, or do you have counter examples? But I am already quite familiar with the catholic church in particular and do not think they are a counter example in the slightest.
Quite the question-begging claim.
> or do you have counter examples
Begin with the existence of God as self-subsisting being. This can be be shown to be a metaphysical necessity with mathematical certainty [0]; its denial leads to incoherence. Following that, one can show what analogous properties this first cause must have, for instance. Such knowledge is a matter of unaided reason, not faith.
Once you establish such truths, matters of faith (like the divinity of Christ) become much easier to reason about and to accept. They become not only eminently reasonable, but the most probable (e.g., "Lord, liar, or lunatic" trilemma, or implausibility of hoax). This latter claim is a faith claim, because while reason and evidence may strongly suggest the claim, it does not possess the deductive certainty of the first.
Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet, watch all these consumers deciding they want something different from what you're proclaiming is better for them.
It's not just a matter of preference or proclamation. There are decades of research showing that more walkable neighborhoods are associated with higher physical activity levels, lower rates of some chronic diseases, more interaction with neighbors, and stronger feelings of community. The debate is usually about how large those effects are and whether they're worth the trade-offs, not whether the effects exist at all.
I'd be more angry with you if I wasn't amused at the frustration you must be feeling in failing to get traction for your dystopian vision.
Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#487Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#488I couldn't read the whole article, but just from the part I could read: > Strikingly, this concern is being openly voiced by the very people who have the strongest incentives to project confidence rather than alarm: the founders of the largest ai laboratories. I don't know, they also have an incentive to make their technology seem transformative and powerful, and saying that your technology has the power to cause a m…
If AI is now ascending an economic learning curve from: 1. Extremely useful (Claude Code & Waymo now) 2. Doing ~everything we do (AGI & Optimus in a few years? 10?) 3. RSI (?) 4. Being smarter than any living person at every intellectual task (?) 5. Being smarter than the best-organized aggregate of all humans (10-100 years?) ...And all of the scientific and resource-allocation institutions that brought us the comput…
Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#489>>Giving birth to a superintelligence would be the most consequential moment in human history—and it is likely to be irreversible, as any “off” switch humanity might design will probably fail. Nothing will be able to stop you from pulling the plug.
> Nothing will be able to stop you from pulling the plug. Who is "you"? And what do you envision is the "plug" to pull? And when does an intelligence become a superintelligence - do "we" know when to pull the "plug"? For example, a superintelligence may be born in a datacenter. Would you expect politicians are aligned with shutting down a datacenter (privately owned) in which they may have heavy stake? What if critic…
Re: Humanity isn't ready for the coming intelligence explosion
#490Earlier quoted context omitted.
„Coders being obsolete” is not a measure of AI capabilities. I see coders being more busy than ever before. I see people without coding knowledge getting more behind. The gap is widening, not shrinking.
I see people without coding ability catching up to learned coders. AI is a huge force multiplier for people who don't have hands on, detailed technical knowledge, AI can increasingly handle that and just needs a human to steer it more broadly.
3 * N 42 - 3 It helps to know layer you're working on.
People seem to make mistake of thinking how good LLMs are around tasks that they are familiar with and extrapolating it to whole population.
It's good mental exercise to think about how little you can do compared to expert on tasks you never thought of working.
Ie. if you're programmer or know something about finance, don't think how much it enables you to do better coding or investing, think instead how much it doesn't enable you to work on something you don't know like maybe molecular biology or visual special effects – it's all there but it's much better multiplier for people who do know their shit.
Knowing layer you're working on helps a lot, it gets multiplied.
Knowing programming is becoming more fundamental skill than ever before as it lies at the foundation of almost everything else.