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

The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

newrepublic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 399 posts

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#371

Post by Quarrelsome »

TheScaryOne wrote: post #326
cortesoft wrote: post #44

I feel like their are (at least) three main critiques of AI, and I wish we could debate them separately, because I think they each have different resolutions. The first is the fear of job loss, and I feel like this is the most straightforward to deal with. Personally, I think the solution should be to share the productivity of AI with society at large, in particular since AI owes most of its abilities to training on…

>The first is the fear of job loss, and I feel like this is the most straightforward to deal with. Personally, I think the solution should be to share the productivity of AI with society at large, in particular since AI owes most of its abilities to training on the works of society. This was the argument about robots. It did not pan out. No taxes materialized. Robots and Automated Machines have not shared productivit…

> Someone said it as a joke, but I want AI to be doing my dishes and sorting my laundry while I write books and compose music. I don't want AI writing books and composing music so I have more time to do my dishes and sort my laundry.

Well then we should maybe ask ourselves why RealityTV gets more views than well written work.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#372

Post by joquarky »

richardw wrote: post #279
cortesoft wrote: post #44

I feel like their are (at least) three main critiques of AI, and I wish we could debate them separately, because I think they each have different resolutions. The first is the fear of job loss, and I feel like this is the most straightforward to deal with. Personally, I think the solution should be to share the productivity of AI with society at large, in particular since AI owes most of its abilities to training on…

> The easiest way would be a straight tax on AI usage, and using that tax to pay a universal basic income Problem for jobs is that there are 200 countries and all the earnings will go to a few. Universal basic income for everyone? Or just the US? Who gets to keep their house locations in a new fair world? The person whose parents bought in the right place 50 years ago? Who pays the money these models earn, if nobody…

It almost seems like you may have already read this short story, but just in case you haven't:

https://marshallbrain.com/manna1

We are spiraling toward the first half of this story. The second half is so idealistic at this point that it can be ignored.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#373

Post by Quarrelsome »

I think specifically those opinionated within current generations mostly hate it. Fruit celebrity love island shows that plenty of younger generations are entirely content to consume its content. Its possible that most current generations would as well. Trash TV is extremely popular and LLMs are well suited to produce that type of content.

Nicki Minaj has factor 10 listens over a band like Tool. The money will pick the close to zero production cost for 9/10ths of the viewers every time and the platforms will prioritise the many.

I very much doubt boycott has enough weight in the long run to hold back generated content from taking over most of the bigger spaces. We've already seen this happen in recent years with staged content mopping up a lot of the most viewed content by manipulating potential viewers. Cheap influencer content has similarly squeezed cultivated content ad revenue through volume and consistency on YouTube.

If you want change then the route would have to be a legal one, not a social movement. Especially since we've mostly forgotten how to do the groundwork for social movements, leaving us all hand wringing and shouting into the void.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#374

Post by joquarky »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #338
cortesoft wrote: post #44

I feel like their are (at least) three main critiques of AI, and I wish we could debate them separately, because I think they each have different resolutions. The first is the fear of job loss, and I feel like this is the most straightforward to deal with. Personally, I think the solution should be to share the productivity of AI with society at large, in particular since AI owes most of its abilities to training on…

> The easiest way would be a straight tax on AI usage, and using that tax to pay a universal basic income. There are obviously a ton of variations on this idea, but I think the general premise of sharing the gains with everyone is sound. I don’t think many would complain if they lost their job but kept their income. Nice, but completely unrealistic. The whole reason why AI is/will be adopted by companies like wildfir…

Why not just cut out the company entirely and go after something much easier to audit: capital gains taxes.

This is money obtained for doing nothing (i.e., like UBI but for the wealthy).

It should be taxed heavily and in inverse proportion to how long the investment was held. For example, HFT gains get a 90% tax. Gains held over 10 years gets a 10% tax. Fit an appropriate curve in the middle.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#375

Post by joquarky »

bdangubic wrote: post #257
cortesoft wrote: post #44

I feel like their are (at least) three main critiques of AI, and I wish we could debate them separately, because I think they each have different resolutions. The first is the fear of job loss, and I feel like this is the most straightforward to deal with. Personally, I think the solution should be to share the productivity of AI with society at large, in particular since AI owes most of its abilities to training on…

USA will never have UBI, period. So any idea that includes any mention of is an absolute non-starter. Outside of the USA, perhaps, but for us that is never happening.

It's false hope.

Any UBI system will become as corrupted as our present tax system.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#376

Post by joquarky »

cortesoft wrote: post #234
happytoexplain wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're backwards. The first point is definitely the most important and most tricky. UBI is a dangerous distraction in this context. It's a mammoth cost to achieve an impoverished quality of life. It may be worth implementing in general, but it absolutely must stay out of the conversation about AI. It's like if the ruling class started announcing that they would like to imprison us all, and your "discussion" about…

What sort of regulation do you think is needed for this?

Substantially increase the capital gains tax and cap inheritance to only enough wealth for a single generation to get by without performing any real work.

This might also come with the benefit of reducing the number of nepo-imbeciles running things now.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#377

Post by joquarky »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #251
cortesoft wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sort of regulation do you think is needed for this?

I think frontier AI research should be outlawed until such time as there's a broad consensus on how society ought to deal with it. This would have to be coordinated internationally to be effective, but I think that would be achievable if the US sent a credible signal by forcibly shutting down any one of the major labs.

How do you enforce this "should" globally?

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#378

Post by joquarky »

keybored wrote: post #346
happytoexplain wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're backwards. The first point is definitely the most important and most tricky. UBI is a dangerous distraction in this context. It's a mammoth cost to achieve an impoverished quality of life. It may be worth implementing in general, but it absolutely must stay out of the conversation about AI. It's like if the ruling class started announcing that they would like to imprison us all, and your "discussion" about…

It is quite telling that so many comments here are about UBI as a solution. UBI is a billionaire proposed solution, or distraction. Yeah, of course they want to keep control of the surplus and just have a sustenance spigot for the former workers. > We are allowed to regulate businesses. We simply don't. If workers are defunct, what are businesses? Also defunct. Business owners can’t gloat about not needing workers wh…

Also, if nobody has money to spend, who are these businesses selling to?

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#379

Post by joquarky »

atmavatar wrote: post #256
estimator7292 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-violent means don't work and get you killed by cops. This is what the people are left with.

Non-violent protests do work, though they require you hit a critical mass to become effective. There even exists a 3.5% rule[1] in political science whereby authoritarian governments will topple if 3.5% of the population engages in nonviolent protest. One of the more famous examples here in the US is that of the equal rights marches in the 1960s ultimately leading to the end of segregation. What I'm not sure of, thou…

> There even exists a 3.5% rule[1] in political science whereby authoritarian governments will topple if 3.5% of the population engages in nonviolent protest.

"When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure"[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law

> equal rights marches in the 1960s

Since then, authoritarian think tanks have planned ahead and now have comprehensive documents for how to nullify the effects of peaceful protests.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#380

Post by joquarky »

nozzlegear wrote: post #300
estimator7292 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-violent means don't work and get you killed by cops. This is what the people are left with.

> Non-violent means don't work MLK Jr.'s Civil Rights protests are an obvious counterpoint to this claim.

Times have changed and authoritarian think tanks have nearly perfected the mitigation of peaceful protests.
Post reply on HN