Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement • Hacker News Board

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#131

Post by oriettaxx » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 6:17 AM UTC

shepherdjerred wrote: post #128

doug_durham wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m in your same demographic. However I see these technologies as career extenders, not career threats. I can learn things faster than ever and adapt to changes more easily.

As someone much younger (mid 20's), I have absolutely no idea what to do. I don't even think there _is_ anything I can do, aside from waiting to see what happens. What happens when programmers are no longer needed? That certainly (I hope) won't happen in 5 years, but given the exponential rate of improvement, I can see programming as a profession being gone in 20-30 years.

you sound too pessimistic

even if programming is gone in 20-30 years, you have plenty of time (and energy) to make your daily move to "what is needed".

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#132

Post by birdyrooster » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 6:28 AM UTC

xiphias2 wrote: post #115

brigadier132 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We obviously understand it can have a lot of beneficial effects in society Really? Because nobody seems to be talking about them. You talk about how bad things "will" occur. What about bad things that are literally happening right now?

Maybe think of the children. Why should they go to school at all? Why should they study? What should they study? What should I tell them? A person who works in tourism just told me that he wants to learn something safer, because he had no job during COVID, so he started studying web design. All I could tell him is that that job has peaked, and I believe tourism is safer at this point.

Maybe they shouldn’t? Jesus what is with people shaming others for not attaining some arbitrary level of education and career?

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#133

Post by SideburnsOfDoom » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 6:51 AM UTC

mtlynch wrote: post #5

user3939382 wrote: post #3

I thought this was the singer, I was so confused…

It is the singer.

* The award-winning singer, musician, songwriter, record producer, and activist.

He has a great voice, but that's hardly everything. He is somewhat of a "grand old man" now. And he makes "grand old man" pronouncements like this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gabriel

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#134

Post by lannisterstark » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 7:21 AM UTC

brigadier132 wrote: post #12

Well said, this thing is here to stay. When I first played around with gpt-4 I was filled with immense dread. I, as many others have, immediately understood what kind of enormous societal impact this would have. But I put the question to myself, if I could magically wish this thing away, would I? I wouldn't. I understand the many that would, this thing completely upends the status quo. Massive swathes of people will…

>When I first played around with gpt-4 I was filled with immense dread

Really? When I played around with it I was filled with incredible optimism and hope. It was an amazing companion that helped me with my code, answered questions, and what I hoped Google Assistant/Alexa/Siri etc would become a few years in. Sadly they never did.

This is amazing, and would be an excellent personal assistant when it becomes cheap enough for smaller personalized LLMs.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#135

Post by ChatGTP » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 7:21 AM UTC

shepherdjerred wrote: post #125

ChatGTP wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think AI is a disaster, think about the potential for medical breakthroughs that can emerge from this. The “think of the good” argument is over played. Same was true for combustion engines, they will probably send us extinct. I’d like it if people just stopped with it. People aren’t idiots, they know good things and very bad things can be achieved.

> Same was true for combustion engines, they will probably send us extinct. Climate change is a serious issue, but you cheapen and discredit it by exaggerating its impact. There is zero chance climate change will cause humans to go extinct. If my stance is incorrect, please reply with some evidence.

I don’t think you need a paper to understand that if unchecked, climate change will mean humans are pretty much done.

At least a modern civilisation like the one we have today. Societal collapse is on the cards for sure if we stay in the current trajectory.

I’m not going to waste time providing you with evidence I’m sorry. You should already understand the situation.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#136

Post by lannisterstark » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 7:22 AM UTC

ChatGTP wrote: post #119

brigadier132 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you seriously suggesting humanity would be better off without the combustion engine? Also, presumably an AI powerful enough to kill vast swathes of humanity would be powerful enough to prevent something like climate change.

Yes, I am absolutely suggesting that. Not all engines but petroleum fuelled combustion engines, yes. The world is going through a mass extinction event because of burning oil and coal and combustion engines have been an absolutely integral part of that ecological disaster. So yes. Just be real about it? Why do “EV” subsidies exist? To wean us off combustion engines to save the planet. Combustion engines should’ve bee…

>Yes, I am absolutely suggesting that.

Alright unabomber. What an unhinged statement that is.

Combustion engine that is arguably one of the major causes of reducing poverty everywhere is a bad thing, I tell you hwat!

I love how you people(and it's generally people from developed countries too lol) can't think beyond your own needs and POVs. Yeah man, how dare the poor people in developing and impoverished nations increase their QoL.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#137

Post by lannisterstark » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 7:26 AM UTC

brigadier132 wrote: post #12

Well said, this thing is here to stay. When I first played around with gpt-4 I was filled with immense dread. I, as many others have, immediately understood what kind of enormous societal impact this would have. But I put the question to myself, if I could magically wish this thing away, would I? I wouldn't. I understand the many that would, this thing completely upends the status quo. Massive swathes of people will…

>If you think AI is a disaster, think about the potential for medical breakthroughs that can emerge from this.

Don't bother. People here love to miser. There's no way you're getting any positive responses to this. Let doom and gloom begin.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#138

Post by ChatGTP » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 7:27 AM UTC

birdyrooster wrote: post #132

xiphias2 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe think of the children. Why should they go to school at all? Why should they study? What should they study? What should I tell them? A person who works in tourism just told me that he wants to learn something safer, because he had no job during COVID, so he started studying web design. All I could tell him is that that job has peaked, and I believe tourism is safer at this point.

Maybe they shouldn’t? Jesus what is with people shaming others for not attaining some arbitrary level of education and career?

Ok so what will they be doing instead ?

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#139

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 7:28 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #61

brigadier132 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We obviously understand it can have a lot of beneficial effects in society Really? Because nobody seems to be talking about them. You talk about how bad things "will" occur. What about bad things that are literally happening right now?

> What about bad things that are literally happening right now? Our lives are good. No child loses sleep for the bogeyman under the neighbor's bed.

[deleted]

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#140

Post by midoridensha » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 7:37 AM UTC

huehehue wrote: post #100

There's a massive piece of the music scene that I can't imagine AI ever replacing. Some genres are formulaic by design, but the draw for so many others is the human experience and the inventiveness. Many people follow artists because they connect with material that could only have come from the artist. One reasonable concern is that tech supplementation will lead to a deluge of derivative work, nullifying the efforts…

>Some genres are formulaic by design, but the draw for so many others is the human experience and the inventiveness.

Those genres are safe (for a while), but they're also a puny portion of the market. American pop music is totally going to be replaced by AI. It's been nothing but awful, formulaic crap for the last 25 years, so there's no way that AI-generated music could possibly be worse.