Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because opposite is true for open source? It is actually for free, whether you contribute to it or not. Anyone can legally use it for free. Torwalds can not just wake up one day and decide to charge more. If you feel like linux is a too much of a monopoly, you can actually fork it and compete.
But I considered that when I said "Good open weights models already exist and people can run them locally." You can have a great LLM model with vast coding knowledge running on your computer right now, for free. It won't be the best one nor the fastest one, but still a very good one.
AI may be making us think and write more alike
251–260 of 271 posts
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
I reached the same conclusion. It also made me realised how most technologies degraded our lives. Before the TV people would go to the theatre. It's becoming hard to find a theatre these days. Artificial light is convenient, it made billion or people develop sleep disorder and we can't see stars at at night. Mass food production supposedly nourished more people: veggies today have 20% the minerals content they had 70…
It's odd to me that you live in a place where it's hard to find a theatre. Living in a cosmopolitan city there's so many theatres with anything from professional shows to amateur dramatics all at very reasonable price points.
My point is that technology displaces or replace activities.
In many cities there are no theatre. To be clear I meant performance theatres by the way.
We used to consume live performance. Drama, dance and whatnot. Comedy for instance is now for the masses, more or less controlled. Costing pennies to distribute via air or streaming platforms. They compete with a more valuable but harder to afford media. so they win.
Is it a net positive that we can converse in almost real time for virtually no cost, with niche communities on the other side of the world. Yes. Anyone can still walk into a Café or the park and engage in conversations with others. But overall, the compounding of all tech advancements and what they displace, I think, is an overall net negative.
Not because I'm an anti progress or losing my job because of technology, quite the opposite. I sat down and wrote down the list. How technology enables VS affects me personally, and other persona. From upperclass worker in New York, to the cocoa bean farmer in Ivory Coast. Overall it appears that technology isn't benefitial to humanity.
I then challenge those who disagree. Typically, they haven't taken into account the negative seriously. The few who concede to do so, eventually agree that the question is in fact complicated and abandon the debate.
It doesn't mean I'm right. I read the detractors in there, perhaps there is something I missed. So far there isn't.
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corporations are not humans. And while sociopaths - who benefit the most from corporations - technically are humans, I don't consider them parts of humanity, more like a cancer tissue on top of it. So whatever benefit humanity gets is more than cancelled by the growing cancer.
The concept of "sociopaths" is more of a cop-out than anything. It amounts to a (vaguely pseudoscientific) dehumanization of those whose modus operandi transgresses our values most severely. Imagining a subset of the population as literal cancer cells does not help us understand better the systemic issue which makes those people benefit disproportionately from metahuman entities (such as corporations or political agg…
Including sociopaths in humanity benefits and protects only them. And it renders the rest of us - their victims - powerless.
If as a society in general we agree that we have a right to keep serious transgressors in prisons, then we should seriously consider keeping there people who are fundamentally incapable of aligning with humanity values - the golden rule of reciprocity in particular.
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do YOU want to die of starvation? Or are you ok with just others dying?
typical emotionally charged, false dichotomy. To your question I'm not ok with either. We will likely ALL die from the impact of industrialization.
Then you must be ok with mass food production, there's no third way.
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
The concept of "sociopaths" is more of a cop-out than anything. It amounts to a (vaguely pseudoscientific) dehumanization of those whose modus operandi transgresses our values most severely. Imagining a subset of the population as literal cancer cells does not help us understand better the systemic issue which makes those people benefit disproportionately from metahuman entities (such as corporations or political agg…
It does help us a lot, actually, and the treatment should be analogical. It's not a cop-out, it's reality. Including sociopaths in humanity benefits and protects only them. And it renders the rest of us - their victims - powerless. If as a society in general we agree that we have a right to keep serious transgressors in prisons, then we should seriously consider keeping there people who are fundamentally incapable of…
As a society in general, do you agree that unjust laws, false positives in enforcement, prison slavery, and endemic rampant abuse of authority, are things that exist?
As a society in general, do you think those are a legitimate price to pay "to keep serious transgressors in prisons"?
As a society in general, do you think serious transgressors more often get locked up for life, or more often get a slap on the wrist and a quiet promotion to more serious transgressors?
As a society in general, how do you know - falsifiably! - that prisons are even effective for their stated purpose?
Just like prisons perpetuate crime, excluding sociopaths and their behavior from what is thinkable as human only permits us to ignore them. And to contrive our own excuses for their sub-criminal abusive behaviors - which is the primary way in which they blend in and remain beyond reproach. You are their enabler. Go figure out how to stop being that.
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#256The LLM people call it "safety" but in reality its censorship and conformity. Yet, it's trivial to get them to talk about how to make a bomb or whatever. It's mostly political in nature. https://www.trackingai.org/political-test You dont accidentally end up entirely left wing libertarian.
That quadrant is where basically all "Western" mainstream academia sits, and has for quite a long time, and they write an awful lot. I am a little surprised that the influence of online "influencer"-speak and marketing, being so voluminous and evident in the things' writing styles, hasn't dragged them other directions, though. Nor the enormous amount of socially authoritarian social media posting. I suppose the forme…
In fact, it should balance out, especially over centuries of global content. There's absolutely no chance that the training data itself is the bias. IT's the filtering and labelling of the content that introduces the bias.
The AI companies are taking left wing content and labelling them "high quality prestige" and then looking at right wing content and labelling it "opinion low quality" or whatever. That is where the bias is occurring.
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. The test I run is "Can it simplify a concept I know in a matter of sentences/words, better than I can?" on a subject area that requires a lot of nuance. And to my disappointment, the LLMs never come close. They dump paragraphs upon paragraphs. I actually want to see the LLMs surprise me. But they disappoint me for what Im specifically looking for.
Hm I gave the prompt: > Summarize a technique for type erasure as is done in C++. Assume that your audience is familiar with all of C++'s features, but not with the technique of type erasure. The briefer the summary, the better, but don't omit any essential pieces or use vague language. ChatGPT Plus generated a lot of text and code. Then I said: > Now please summarize using only a few sentences. and it replied: > Typ…
The point is you shouldn't have to re-prompt multiple times because a thing that 'understands' undergoes expressing the thing in a broad way and then abstracts away what matters whilst minimizing loss of important details.
The reality is LLMs are not intelligent, in any way shape or form.
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it pretty good, though? :) I wouldn't let that go out the door. Needs a *lot* of TLC.
Yes, it's missing a few important pieces. As is, it more describes how dynamic dispatch works.
Pmsl and you're missing the whole point.
A thing that eventually brute forces its way to a solution is not a) demonstrating understanding b) intelligent.
Im not sure why these basic things have to be uttered. I suppose its because many here don't really work on stuff that requires this level of thinking.
Reminds me of the same delusional people that think LLMs are the solution to education et al when they completely miss the point of what the real problems in education actually are.
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#259LLMs have felt to me like they excel in one particular skill (being able to make connections across vast amounts of knowledge) and are basically average, otherwise. If I'm below average at something (painting, say) the results astound me. But if I'm above average (programming, writing (I like to think)), I'm generally underwhelmed by the results. I used Claude a lot for planning my current fun project. Good rubber du…
I'd argue that they're above average for the population, and below average for experts. Can they draw as well as an expert/professional illustrator? Probably not. Can they draw better than almost anyone who isn't a expert/professional illustrator? Probably. I think the value we're losing is where people are bad at things, which is often where new ideas/approaches come from, but this is a macro metric, so it's a hard…
This has always been true for any new technology. However, what's bizarre here is, billions and potentially trillions are being dumped into learning this the hard way.
There's a reason why specialisation is a thing and has driven economies forward for the better part of the last century. This is not going away. 'Democractisation' is a pipe-dream and frankly it should be - equal opportunity not equal outcome.
Re: AI may be making us think and write more alike
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm below average at something (painting, say) the results astound me. But if I'm above average (programming, writing (I like to think)), I'm generally underwhelmed by the results. Industrial scale dunning kruger/gell man amnesia. We're ~5 years in to the meme of "wow, every white collar profession other than MINE is doomed. But yeah, mine requires really specific domain knowledge, taste, and problem solving, so I'…
The expectations are just too low for LLMs. It’s like a children or a puppy. People get impressed and go “how cute” at anything it does. I see designers and PMs vibe coding shit that they would complain for days if it was delivered by a developer. I see C-Levels delivering reports that would make them eviscerate some intern.
Btw I was at one point a product manager and I think most PMs are useless lol.