21–30 of 77 posts
But it doesn’t really rival government power, given that the government would most likely crush anything that truly tries to compete.
(and if you don’t have the power to compete, do you truly rival it?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Open weights deter capex? Who cares!? Nvidia isn't paying me to increase Openai's capex. I want tokens, not capex. Am I misconstruing the argument?
no it's people presenting "this is good for a handful of companies" as if it is the "desirable outcome for the general population" even if the final consequences seem rather bad for the general population and might even threaten democracy
The important meta-conclusion that the article sadly misses is that the government will soon be using AI to regulate AI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Friend of mine got a new job. He’s required to and only allowed to use Copilot (because muh trusted enterprise partner). He also has to pay for his subscription/usage out of pocket. Of course they didn’t tell him this until after on-boarding. The corpo fucks want their cake and to eat it too. That’s where we are headed. Having the privilege to pay to have a bot do our jobs for us.
I don't think this is legal?? It's like telling someone they have to drive none stop for their job but neither giving them a company car or nor a budget for it. (To be clear done and companies get away with it != legal. I know companies sometimes get away with exactly the example I named in some cases.)
Governments already use AI labs for surveillance, so, just the ownership will change, the victims will always be the citizens (Eg. see Flock cameras). Nothing gets better.
The "delusions of grandeur" phase of the hype cycle.
As Moises Naim says, these days power is easy to get, hard to use, easy to loose. As complexity/unpredictability rises in any system its natual that govt will shed power. We have already seen this with setting of interest rates. There is a long list of reasons why the Treasury Dept, President, House, Senate, Supreme Court or NASA doesnt get to set the rate. Why did they hand over that power to the central bank? Read…
Nevertheless, if one were to turn their backs on existing research, not only would they draw the ire of academics (idc that much), but also would have to do a lot of stuff from scratch themselves, which usually is quite the undertaking.
These flamewars are not uncommon in CS, and usually involve forces and intellects much bigger than mine, and we often end up looking back at viable things left behind in computing history, just because the mainstream decided to go a different way.
If we are to outsource thinking to AI models, we will outsource these consensus driven 'rational' decisions to them, and then AI companies will have a pretty large say on what 'correct' opinions will look like.