301–310 of 359 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you mean ~35% ?
I mean if you cut out the bottom 65% and the top 1% (but perhaps even top 5%) of americans, you are left with a group of generally affluent people who are the actual backbone of the US economy. These people work white collar career jobs, own houses, own stocks, have retirement on track, college debt paid off or soon to be, good health insurance, go on vacations, drive new(ish) cars, let their instagram impulse buying…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone who thinks these companies ever cared about any of that is naive.
I mean naivety is the default until wisdom born of experience prevails. I bought into the “do no evil” mantra of Google, and boy howdy did I learn the hard lessons from that. It’s partly not arbitrarily punishing the naive unless they refuse to learn the lesson. Invite them in, acknowledging the error in judgement, and help them to be better going forward. That’s how we win.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone who thinks these companies ever cared about any of that is naive.
Then I am naive, but I think they cared before they got powerful and chatgpt release.
And to think I got warned in another post that I need to be nicer/more professional in discussing this topic. Yeah. Nah. Bringing out the same drum I’ve been banging for years now , these companies have never actually cared about ensuring safe AI, regulation, or ensuring it benefits all humanity. It has always, always , been about control and their profit margins. Their actions have never reflected any sort of positi…
ClosedAI executive literally posted that the administration should disseminate FUD through various agencies in order to protect their profits. Commodie has been crying wolf for years to protect their profits. Now they are openly literally conspiring to protect their profits.
“How could we have seen it coming?!” Easily.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bringing out the same drum I’ve been banging for years now, these companies have never actually cared about ensuring safe AI, regulation, or ensuring it benefits all humanity. It has always, always, been about control and their profit margins. Their actions have never reflected any sort of positive, shared human benefit since OpenAI released ChatGPT, and they’ll never actually provide said shared benefit when it co…
What should they do instead? As far as I can tell from their actions they (Anth) are true believers about safety
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please explain how making it difficult to start a business and hire employees protects people. I've never understood that logic but maybe I'm missing something.
It's very simple to start a business, and it's even simpler to hire people. It is hard to fire employee, especially when the company is doing good, yes. It is a bit slow and administratively annoying to start a business in some countries, yes, though in those you can usually start operating while starting AND there are workarounds which is why there isn't enough pressure to stop it (eg, the german "pre made company s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it is not just copyrighted works. openai and anthropic and google etc hire PHDs to create datasets by solving problems, writing thinking traces. then they train their models on those datasets. also as another user said, what is this 80+ years to protect some text? its ridiculous
It's only ridiculous for the big thieves, but if you violate copyright, you'll pay dearly. Calling it ridiculous will not protect you.
Always better to name them outright.
Anthropic STOLE data for training. Verifiably. Admitted. In court. Then settled.[0]
You can also likely assume that OpenAI did too. There simply wasn’t enough data without having done so at least at some point in their corporate history. In fact, I seem to recall they were able to extract Harry Potter text from all the major modes[1]
https://fortune.com/2026/07/21/anthropic-copyright-settlemen... [0]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> model welfare I shouldn't get in arguments about this stuff online, but have you actually sat down and thought about this in-depth? It's pretty normal to have a gut reaction that this is insane, but it's worth thinking about. If we replaced every neuron in your brain, one by one, with a silicon equivalent, would you stop being conscious? At what point? Would you be able to tell? If yes, what about if we took those…
>> If we replaced every neuron in your brain, one by one, with a silicon equivalent, would you stop being conscious? If we put your brain in a jar, would you be a person? Would you have normal consciousness? Honestly I don't know and I am not the person to ask. But the brain is just a computer metaphor has flaws, particularly when you take account how poorly the brain is understood.
My issue was more just that people see the concept of a thinking machine and immediately reject it because it sounds silly, without thinking about it.
And to think I got warned in another post that I need to be nicer/more professional in discussing this topic. Yeah. Nah. Bringing out the same drum I’ve been banging for years now , these companies have never actually cared about ensuring safe AI, regulation, or ensuring it benefits all humanity. It has always, always , been about control and their profit margins. Their actions have never reflected any sort of positi…
It is critically important to the future of your progeny, that 1-2 companies are not able to corner the AI landscape.
Open-source and open-weight or we throw ourselves on the machine worthy.