Aren't you guys looking forward to the day when we get the opportunity to go the way of all those horses? You should! I'm optimistic; I think I'd make a fine pot of glue.
AI, faster please!
Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
251–260 of 663 posts
Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#252The 1220s horse bubble was a wild time. People walked everywhere all slow and then BAM guys on horses shooting arrows at you.
AI is like that, but instead with dudes in slim fitting vests blogging about alignment
Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#253Horses eat feed. Cars eat gasoline. LLMs eat electricity, and progress may even now be finding its limits in that arena. Besides the fact that just more compute and context size aren’t the right kind of progress. LLMs aren’t coming for your job any more than computer vision is, for a lot of reasons, but I’ll list two more: 1. Even if LLMs made everyone 10x as productive, most companies will still have more work to do…
> The only reason to reduce headcount is to remove people who already weren’t providing much value. There were many secretaries up until the late 20th century that took dictation, either writing notes of what they were told or from a recording, then they typed it out and distributed memos. At first, there were many people typing, then later mimeograph machines took away some of those jobs, then copying machines made…
The crucial observation is the fact that automation has historically been a net creator of jobs, not destroyer.
Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#254Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing that the ultra-wealthy desire above all else is power and privilege , and they won't be getting either of that in those bunkers. They sure as shit won't be content to leave the rest of us alone.
Yeah I know it's an unrealistic ideal but it's fun to think about. That said my theory about power and privilege is that it's actually just a symptom of a deep fear of death. The reason gaining more money/power/status never lets up is because there's no amount of money/power/status that can satiate that fear, but somehow naively there's a belief that it can. I wouldn't be surprised if most people who have any amount…
Going off your earlier comment, what if instead of a revolution, the oligarchs just get hooked up to a simulation where they can pretend to rule over the rest of humanity forever? Or what if this already happened and we're just the peasants in the simulation
Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Computers replaced humans as the best chess players, not computers with human oversight. Oh? I sat down for a game of chess against a computer and it never showed up. I was certain it didn't show up because computers are unable to without human oversight, but tell me why I'm wrong.
Apparently human chess grandmasters also need “oversight” from airplanes, because without those, essentially none of them would show up at elite tournaments.
Things like trains, boats, and cars exist. Human chess grandmasters can show up to elite tournaments, and perform while there, without airplanes. Computer chess systems, on the other hand, cannot do anything without human oversight.
Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#257To stay within the engine analogy.
We have engines that are more powerful than horses, but
1. we aren’t good at building cars yet,
2. they break down so often that using horses often still ends up faster,
3. we have dirt tracks and feed stations for horses but have few paved roads and are not producing enough gasoline.
Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I know it's an unrealistic ideal but it's fun to think about. That said my theory about power and privilege is that it's actually just a symptom of a deep fear of death. The reason gaining more money/power/status never lets up is because there's no amount of money/power/status that can satiate that fear, but somehow naively there's a belief that it can. I wouldn't be surprised if most people who have any amount…
Going off your earlier comment, what if instead of a revolution, the oligarchs just get hooked up to a simulation where they can pretend to rule over the rest of humanity forever? Or what if this already happened and we're just the peasants in the simulation
I like this future, the Meta-verse has found its target market
Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, from the perspective of the ultra-wealthy us humans are already pretty worthless and they'll be glad to get rid of us. But from the perspective of a human being, an animal, and the environment that needs love, connection, mutual generosity and care, another human being who can provide those is priceless. I propose we break away and create our own new economy and the ultra-wealthy can stay in their fully optimis…
Charlie Chaplin's speech is more relevant now than ever before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7GY1Xg6X20
I first saw this about 15 years ago and it had a profound impact on me. It's stuck with me ever since
"Don't give yourselves to these unnatural men, machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts. You are not machines, you are not cattle, you are men. You have the love of humanity in your hearts."
Spoken 85 years ago and even more relevant today
Re: Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The only reason to reduce headcount is to remove people who already weren’t providing much value. There were many secretaries up until the late 20th century that took dictation, either writing notes of what they were told or from a recording, then they typed it out and distributed memos. At first, there were many people typing, then later mimeograph machines took away some of those jobs, then copying machines made…
The crucial observation is the fact that automation has historically been a net creator of jobs, not destroyer.
Sure, if you're content to stack shelves.
AI isn't automation. It's thinking. It automates the brain out of human jobs.
You can still get a job that requires a body. My job doesn't require a body, so I'm screwed. If you're say, a surgeon or a plumber, you're in a better place.