the last thing the powers that be want is for the masses to be able to become more productive than them
Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
61–70 of 97 posts
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#62As a tech small business owner this is unfair that I can't be as smart by using the same level of intelligence as the top companies in the usa. This policy just keeps the powerful in power. And it's crazy because I already lost my job due to AI.
> same level of intelligence as the top companies in the usa. I would not be worried about it at all. These models are expensive to train and after shrinking the market for these models to just few entities, it will take centuries to just break even.
you are missing the part that they can print more to keep them going. it's already the case new printed fiat already goes to them via inv. bankers and such. those valulation and spending all come via "printing". it hops few funds/LPs and the. ends up in labs.
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
This kind of thinking is the root of most populist rhetoric - that money and wealth is zero sum and it just shifts hands. This is false and a dangerous rabbit hole of an ideology to get into.
How is money not zero sum? I agree prosperity as such isn't, but money, land, other things are limited. And wealth is only wealth because not everybody else has as much, right? As in, it doesn't matter if you have a dollar and I have 100, or you have 1 trillion dollars and I have 100 trillion dollars, it's the same difference.
"fiat money" is not limited. wtf? they keep printing without matching anyting or giving anything for new prints. new printed money ends of up VC companies and selected inv. bankers favorites (aka Elon) it's not fully zero sum because you can take positining to these. Getting allocation or finding the real undervalued stock is real hard part
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
money is never truly lost In fact, money is printing every day more and more. So technically there is more of them every day. Which decrease their value and then we have inflation.
But, ideally, with each day, more useful products and services are being made and delivered. It'd be useful to have extra dollars around to account for more stuff being made and more things being done. Thus having more dollars in existence doesn't necessarily mean the value of a dollar is decreasing. What does cause inflation, however, is when more dollars are printed versus things being made. You can't precisely mea…
problem is majority of the new printed fiat money goes to VC funded labs and few stocks (selected by inv. bankers). new dollar does not mean average person gets more products and services. Your accessability is no longer because wealthy top does not let other companies and people to get benefit of it. aka financial eng. This is a new era. IPOs make you lose money, they push to valuation to trillions so you dont get no real return. they use your retirement funds to hedge their stocks. ALL LEGALLY. back then apple or nvidia or google gave public few 100x or more.
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#65More often than not, money is never truly lost; it is just passed from one person's hand to another. I believe that with the help of the big tech companies, governments have found faster and better ways to move money from the hands of the many with little into the hands of the few with a lot. The layoffs are an example of this as coders, assitance and other white-collar workers are replaced by AI for low prices so as…
Money can be lost - if lots of it are invested in endeavors that don't pan out, a good chunk of it simply gets wasted. As in: we really did have a bunch of money that we could have spent on many valuable things, but we didn't, so instead of food on the table we collectively get bupkis for it all.
If you invested money into a trade where you bought and lost, there is someone else or others who sold and won. You may have lost that particular sum at that time, but someone else gained a part or some of that sum you lost. If you invested in building and opening a shop and eventually closed it because it wasn't making money. We can say the workers hired to construct the store made money from that investment, the manufacturers and wholesalers you bought from made revenue from selling you their products, which you intended to sell for higher prices to make a profit. You are right in your assessment that you could lose money, but that loss was someone else's gain, hence money moved from you to them. In this life, two seemingly opposing ideas could be correct at the same time.
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#66I'm done. The cognitive dissonance over AI has jumped the shark. It's not fair that it's everywhere. It's not fair that only a few have it. It's not fair that it uses so much electricity. It's not fair that it's killing my environment. It's not fair there's a datacenter in my back yard. It's not fair there isn't a datacenter in my back yard. It's not fair that it threatens my job. It's not fair that my employer doesn…
You forgot that its making all the games and electronics more expensive for everyone
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#67[flagged]
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Small business owner in the U.S. ?
Not OP but I fit into this category (Small Business owner in the US). Yes, I’m in the US but I somehow doubt my single person LLC is going to qualify for access to these cutting edge models. And frankly, that’s bullshit. This will only serve to further entrench the big players and the only way to get access to these models will be to already be successful or bribery. That’s a pretty bleak future. One thing I’ve thoug…
Yeah, I agree completely. This is very worrisome and is creating a multi class system.
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Money can be lost - if lots of it are invested in endeavors that don't pan out, a good chunk of it simply gets wasted. As in: we really did have a bunch of money that we could have spent on many valuable things, but we didn't, so instead of food on the table we collectively get bupkis for it all.
If you invested money into a trade where you bought and lost, there is someone else or others who sold and won. You may have lost that particular sum at that time, but someone else gained a part or some of that sum you lost. If you invested in building and opening a shop and eventually closed it because it wasn't making money. We can say the workers hired to construct the store made money from that investment, the ma…
I'm talking about as a society. There's no "1st law of thermodynamics" for the value of the money. If the world spends a shitload of money on something that doesn't pan out, that means we squandered actual finite resources - human labor, materials, and energy that we previously had.
Manufacturing ordnance just to blow up caves in Afghanistan that the USSR already just spent 20 years blowing up doesn't yield fruit - the materials and labor on both sides quite literally goes up in smoke.
Simply, it is absolutely the case that wealth sometimes gets destroyed rather than merely transferred. Sure, the fiat dollars might "just circulate" but that's an uninteresting, trivial tautology. When people talk about "losing money" in the general case, the meaning of those terms transcend the pedantic, trivial case that you espouse.
When the whole world gets feverish over an investment fad that's doomed to fail, "spending money on it" really means "allocating vast resources in the hope that we all get a return on that investment". If we don't get any return, all that investment truly is lost - destroyed, even. There have been cases where we (the humans of Planet Earth) had wealth that we could have done anything with, we chose to put it towards something that didn't work out, and now it's just gone.
(To be clear: I don’t think AI specifically is valueless)
Re: Everyone feared AI taking over; the real danger is AI serving just the few
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you invested money into a trade where you bought and lost, there is someone else or others who sold and won. You may have lost that particular sum at that time, but someone else gained a part or some of that sum you lost. If you invested in building and opening a shop and eventually closed it because it wasn't making money. We can say the workers hired to construct the store made money from that investment, the ma…
I'm talking about as a society. There's no "1st law of thermodynamics" for the value of the money. If the world spends a shitload of money on something that doesn't pan out, that means we squandered actual finite resources - human labor, materials, and energy that we previously had. Manufacturing ordnance just to blow up caves in Afghanistan that the USSR already just spent 20 years blowing up doesn't yield fruit - t…
The part of the bomb is an interesting perspective, and I do believe you are right on this one. Basically, you could blow up a place with a bomb you invested more in and achieve your particular goal, or not achieve it at all, and still lose money. I yield