Live data from Hacker News

To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

musings.martyn.berlin

251–260 of 339 posts

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#251
I've always liked new technological discoveries, and LLMs is no exception. It's an amazing breakthrough.

But the actual benefits for society are honestly underwhelming. Yes, we can code faster now -- but was there a serious problem with humanity being unable to produce enough code fast enough? We can write emails faster, and summarize documents much faster -- ok, yes, that does make some people more productive, myself included. But yeah, email also made us more productive than typewriters, which made us more productive than hand-written letters. LLMs might uncover medical discoveries that humans just couldn't on our own? Uh, maybe? I mean we've had ML/DL models for a while and they're getting better.

And then you consider the way that AI is being implemented, developed, invested in, and pushed, by large corporations, whatever benefits there could be from LLMs, are highly outweighed by the negative effects on society as a whole. It is a highly destructive force in almost every area. It could be a force for good, but at the rate we're going, it will not be, because that's not the profitable path.

Nuclear fission was an amazing scientific discovery as well! And yet if it weren't for strict regulations, international treaties, UN-verification agencies, major protests against nuclear weapons etc., there's a pretty good chance that millions would have died by now by some nuclear weapon. (In addition to the hundreds of thousands who did die by nuclear fission in Nagasaki and Hiroshima -- which makes you wonder if the discovery of nuclear fission was worth it at all.) (Ah, but nuclear-backed MAD prevents conventional wars that might have killed millions anyway! Yes, that argument has some merit but I'm certainly not convinced. I'm old enough to remember feeling like we were literally a button-press away from destroying much of humanity. The weird thing is that we still are, we just don't think about it much because it hasn't happened yet.)

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#252
post #6

This post, like many others, confuses AI with Big Tech (or maybe that's intentional). I can wholehartedly agree with everything said there, if I mentally replace "AI" with "big tech profitmaxxing using this new tech". I however, don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater: https://blog.senko.net/how-i-want-to-use-ai

I agree. It's a finance capitalism issue. The people who build data centers get free reign on the use energy, land, water and the atmosphere while everyone will bear the cost. Its another upward transfer of wealth. Another wealth pump as Peter Turchin describes it. This could end whatever democratic process is left. The West will be just like China but worse. Slower trains and more violent. At least in China, Political power is in control of capital.

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#253
post #2

Exactly. Each time you criticize the techno-fascist system that props up AI here, people downvote blindly without even trying to understand why authoritarian regimes love surveillance technologies like AI allows

A principal dogma on orange reddit is the neutrality of technology. Most people here are opposed to the nigh inevitable incipient use of AI in mass surveillance but don't think that that has any relationship to their use of AI (for example) as "Google that actually works." Whether they are right, I am not sure.

They lack the understanding that technology is not separate from society. Both go together, and CANNOT be analyzed without each other.

People who did engineering studies often think that "tech is pure", it's a simple "knowledge field" where something is "true or not". That's completely wrong. Tech is indissociable from society

But engineers don't understand that. Only researchers (and militants) do

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#254
post #2

Exactly. Each time you criticize the techno-fascist system that props up AI here, people downvote blindly without even trying to understand why authoritarian regimes love surveillance technologies like AI allows

I don't think that's true, from what I've seen the people on here are pretty consistently anti surveillance

Then they just lack the realization or understanding that in a capitalistic society, the ONLY possible use for AI is surveillance

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#255
post #2

Exactly. Each time you criticize the techno-fascist system that props up AI here, people downvote blindly without even trying to understand why authoritarian regimes love surveillance technologies like AI allows

>Each time you criticize the techno-fascist system that props up AI here Every time I criticize the Vikings on The Ultimate Vikings Enthusiast-and-Reenactment Society web forums, they downvote me too. It's ridiculous. Don't they have any integrity? Do they not believe in freedom of speech? One guy even started to rant about how the subforum's topic was specifically about a torment where the vikings would cut out of a…

If you think that people working in tech shouldn't be capable of criticizing their own domain, and taking a step back to understand what they're helping build, I can't do much for you

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#256
post #31

Controversial take: It's weird to see people in tech taking this stance. They've been riding the same wave of exploiting the average person through economies of scale for the last 20+ years, but now that it affects them, it's suddenly catastrophic. You dont get to benefit from the expansion of companies like Uber, airbnb or meta, then pretend like you were always focused on the success of the average person. You didn…

You make a good point; but the scale of destruction is by no means the same now.

Most of the US jobs were lost not to automation, but to outsourcing in pursuit of profits. A similar problem of corporate exploitation, but not so much a technological one.

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#257
post #24

It's funny, I have the opposite experience of everyone around me hating AI. I'm not aggressively pro-AI around them at all but you aren't allowed to have any positive or nuanced opinion of the tech. I'm used to it though, I've been excited by the concept of AI since reading about Turing and such as a child 20 years ago. The idea has always been met with negativity, IMO because people want to feel that they have a par…

I don't think the AI criticism has anything to do with "thinking we are beyond nature or whatever". It's the realization that this force will only drive societies apart even more

Noticed how the proponents of AI are the Musk, Thiel, Palantir, and other, who have wet dreams about authoritarianism, control, and subjuging minorities?

Don't you think there's a reason for this?

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#258
post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Anyone who uses is hypocritical" is a pretty insane take, even for HN. All technologies have benefits and costs — choosing and using a technology does not imply the nonexistence of tradeoffs. One can give sufficient consideration to the downsides, and then determine that the upsides outweigh them. It's not rocket science.

Sure, but those people who "considered the downsides" shouldn't then moralize about the exploitation of workers; they're contributing to it. It's explicitly hypocritical. They're explicitly deciding the exploitation is worth the upsides for their or their company's benefit. I'm not excluding myself from this. Just chafing against this grandstanding by people actively contributing to the same problems, and especially…

I generalized the statement from one cloud to big public clouds categorically to show by hyperbole that ... what difference does it make?! [One can find analogous critiques of Azure, GCP, etc.]

Last year, AWS did ≥ $100B in revenue across millions of customers. But where do you draw the line exactly? "Everyone who uses is " feels extreme.

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#259
post #6

This post, like many others, confuses AI with Big Tech (or maybe that's intentional). I can wholehartedly agree with everything said there, if I mentally replace "AI" with "big tech profitmaxxing using this new tech". I however, don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater: https://blog.senko.net/how-i-want-to-use-ai

Well, but the data centers needed for AI are on a much different scale than what "big tech profitmaxxing" used to need. I also agree with the author and you. Morally, I also cannot support the toll it takes on the environment, workers, and society in general. However, what's the option? Either be part of it or get laid off. Build an AI startup or be employeed in one and get that money or well I really cannot imagine…

I guess the third path could be to use it as less as possible, hopefully finding a job that doesn't enforces its use. Still learn how to use it in case that becomes your only viable option in a few years time. And don't forget how to program by hand, for che case where in a few years time AI didn't improve as much(or just costs too much) and we discover there is a lot of messy AI codeto fix. In that case you might be able to keep your moral stance and still get paid reasonably

Re: To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks

#260
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cut my teeth in tech building a regional classifieds website for a local newspaper Tell me all about how it was worse than the print classifieds that already existed I'm very curious to hear your take

Not the original poster, but moving classifieds online lost newspapers a whole lot of money, money that previously financed quality journalism, not to mention the people in charge of maintaining the classifieds ads business. If you are working for the newspaper, your job is a reaction to the death of the original business, and you are the automation that came in their stead

> moving classifieds online lost newspapers a whole lot of money

I was part of the online division of a newspaper. Online classifieds did lose them money, but for my company at least, moving them online was an effort to stop losing all of the money from them.

> you are the automation that came in their stead

Sure. We hired fewer people to answer phones for managing their classified ads, but we hired more people to moderate the site and make sure people weren't posting obscene stuff. And it also employed a handful of software developers.

I'm not convinced it was a total loss. I can't speak to the quality journalism part though

Post reply on HN