Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Am An AI Hater

anthonymoser.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 515 posts

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#271

Post by modeless »

magicalist wrote: post #268
modeless wrote: post #247

Real crab bucket mentality here. We live in an age of wonders, literally the best time in human history to be alive, sci-fi turning to reality as we are on the brink of huge advances in space exploration, computation, robotics, biology, you name it. No matter how good things get there will always be people filled with this sort of rage, but what bothers me is how badly this site wants to upvote this stuff. HN is supp…

Eh, it's not a great article, but I prefer the balance of it being present. FWIW I feel seemingly the opposite, that there are way too many posts here filled with comments by AI startup CEOs or comments copied from r/singularity circa February. It seems equally boring and nontechnical as what you describe.

I don't want a "balance" where we have half r/singularity slop and half luddite rage. Those aren't the only choices. I want interesting apolitical technical content, as encouraged by the guidelines, written and commented on by people who know what they're talking about.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#272

Post by frozenseven »

rsoto2 wrote: post #250
runjake wrote: post #213

You know an argument is going to be strong when it starts off by citing a Teen Vogue article and uses phrases like: "[AI] is at its core a fascist technology rooted in the ideology of supremacy" and "The people who build it are vapid shit-eating cannibals glorifying ignorance." tl;dr: This person professes to hate AI. They repeat the same arguments as others who hate AI, ignoring that it is an emerging technology wit…

The article is "I'm an AI hater" it's about hating AI and why. Whats wrong with "at its core a fascist technology" do you not understand the statement? Companies like Palantir are using shitty targeting AI to literally mass murder children. Yes this technology you used was funded and created in partnership with apartheid governments. AWS and Microsucks are happy to lend a hand. The industry has fascist leadership, ye…

If I were to make a list of companies and organizations that are the most "influential" in the space of AI, Palantir would not make the top 100. And I don't subscribe to your views about them either.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#273

Post by petralithic »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #263
petralithic wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same in what sense? That is the real question, and perhaps not even the important one when it comes to art. Because, if the Pollock is more "important," there is an implication that it's better because it's by a more famous person, while art should be able to come from anywhere and anyone.

The same in whatever sense you want to compare the art rather than the creators. Pollocks try to convey the action and emotion of the creation process. Our hypothetical copycat lacks that higher level meaning, even though they've created an otherwise similar physical product. As an aside: ...art should be able to come from anywhere and anyone. is an immensely political view (and one I happen to agree with). It's not…

It depends what the copycat was thinking, maybe they wanted to follow in Pollock's footsteps, maybe they wanted to showcase the point you're making, whether a copycat is as good as the real thing and therefore also considered art, perhaps even as important (apprentices often copied their masters, such as da Vinci's), maybe they are just creating it because it looks good. If there's no other reasoning, then I'd still say they're the same, because how can one say they're not art too? Even as an observer of the art, what if I like the copycat more? These are all open questions to the philosophy of art and I'm glad it's accessible today to everyone rather than only to the historically abled.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#274

Post by ACCount37 »

sarchertech wrote: post #212
ACCount37 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who has "the goal to create conscious AGI", exactly? AI industry doesn't push for "consciousness" in any way. What AI industry is trying to build is more capable systems. They're succeeding. You can't measure "consciousness", but you sure can measure performance. And the performance of frontier AI systems keeps improving.

OpenAI openly has a goal to build AGI. We don't know if AGI without consciousness is possible. Some people think that it's not. Many people certainly think that consciousness might be an emergent property that comes along with AGI. >AI industry doesn't push for "consciousness" in any way. What AI industry is trying to build is more capable systems. If you're being completely literal, no one wants slaves. They want wh…

We don't know if existing AI systems are "conscious". Or, for that matter, if an ECU in a year 2002 Toyota Hilux is.

We don't even know for certain if all humans are conscious either. It could be another one of those things that we once thought everyone has, but then it turned out that 10% of people somehow make do without.

With how piss poor our ability to detect consciousness is? If you decide to give a fuck, then best you can do for now is acknowledge that modern AIs might have consciousness in some meaningful way (or might be worth assigning moral weight to for other reasons), which is what Anthropic is rolling with. That's why they do those "harm reduction" things - like letting an AI end a conversation on its end, or probing some of the workloads for whether an AI is "distressed" by performing them, or honoring agreements and commitments they made to AI systems, despite those AIs being completely unable to hold them accountable for it.

Of course, not giving a fuck about any of that "consciousness" stuff is a popular option too.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#275

Post by TeMPOraL »

jay_kyburz wrote: post #224
nahuel0x wrote: post #128

This was a merchant who sold pills that had been invented to quench thirst. You need only swallow one pill a week, and you would feel no need for anything to drink. "Why are you selling those?" asked the little prince. "Because they save a tremendous amount of time," said the merchant. "Computations have been made by experts. With these pills, you save fifty-three minutes in every week." "And what do I do with those…

I think the little prince is being a contrary little shit. I'm sure sometimes he would prefer to play in the park, jump-rope with friends, or draw a picture than just walk an hour whether he wanted to or not.

I do agree with your view of the Little Prince. Still, the irony is, the validity of the merchant's argument is irrelevant. 53 person-minutes per week is a tiny benefit compared to eliminating logistics around manufacturing and shipping beverages.

For better or worse, in real world, conditions like these end up with the market forcing adoption of the solution, whether the people on the receiving end like it or not.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#276

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

perching_aix wrote: post #92
randcraw wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Picasso's Guernica was born of hate, his hate of war, of dehumanization for petty political ends. No computer will ever empathize with the senseless inhumanity of war to produce such a work. It must forever parrot.

To honor the "spirit" of OP's post: I looked up Picasso's Guernica now out of curiosity. I don't understand what's so great about this artwork . Or why it would represent any of the things you mention. It just looks like deranged pencilwork. It also comes across as aggressively pretentious. What makes that any better than some highly derivative AI generated rubbish I connect to about the same amount?

nazis held the same believe.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#277

Post by petralithic »

Palomides wrote: post #242
petralithic wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which artists care about coding AI like Copilot? All the ones I talked to simply do not care. Regarding economic means, I asked them whether they'd care if they lived in a post scarcity society where they could make art all day and not have to worry about their material needs being met, ie they're rich, and it turns out if that were the case, they didn't care about what people did with AI, be it image generation or c…

so here's the thing, artists like making the art, skipping the making leaves you with nothing most artists I know are against AI because they feel it is anti-human, devaluing and alienating both the viewer and the creator some can tolerate it as a tool, and some (as is long art tradition) will use it to offend or be contrarian, but these are not the common position if I were a spherical cow in a vacuum with infinite…

They don't have to use AI though, they can leave people who do alone. But that's not what I see, I see artists getting mad at the latter and when I dig deep, it turns out they're scared it'll take their digital commission work. This has primarily been my experience talking with artists I commission as well as people online on Twitter and reddit for example.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#278

Post by petralithic »

myhf wrote: post #96
danielbln wrote: post #12

Yet it is here to stay, won't go away and even if it won't get any better at the useful things it does, it is useful. The externalities are real, some can be removed, some mitigated. If you're a hater and a human, then you don't have to mitigate anything, of course. Me, I hate the externalities, but I love the thing. I want to use my own AI, hyper optimized and efficient and private. It would mitigate a lot. Maybe so…

> the useful things it does It's weird how AI-lovers are always trying to shoehorn an unsupported "it does useful things" into some kind of criticism sandwich where only the solvable problems can be acknowledged as problems. Just because some technologies have both upsides and downsides doesn't mean that every technology automatically has upsides. GenAI is good at generating these kinds of hollow statements that mimi…

> doesn't mean that every technology automatically has upsides

Who said "every technology?" We're talking about a specific one here with specific up and downsides delineated.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#279

Post by petralithic »

satisfice wrote: post #148
dpoloncsak wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last time we saw a bet from Wall St like we are seeing with AI, was when they bet on the internet. Do you still use the internet?

I still use the Internet. The Internet is also a technology that undermines society.

You are free not to use it if that is what you believe.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#280

Post by petralithic »

Mallowram wrote: post #17
danielbln wrote: post #12

Yet it is here to stay, won't go away and even if it won't get any better at the useful things it does, it is useful. The externalities are real, some can be removed, some mitigated. If you're a hater and a human, then you don't have to mitigate anything, of course. Me, I hate the externalities, but I love the thing. I want to use my own AI, hyper optimized and efficient and private. It would mitigate a lot. Maybe so…

[dead]

I don't understand this sentence. What is "operating the arbitrary?"
Post reply on HN