561–570 of 575 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
A glance at Wikipedia shows that this is somewhere between misleading overstatement and gross hyperbole, and under contention besides.
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA000221...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, what's the goal here? AI does everything and then... and then what? We all die? Most of us die except a select few who rule the world (which, by the way, would not include you or me)? The reason we won't let AI run rampant is because it's anti-human. Even if AI can do everything, why would we allow it to? We don't have to do that, that's very much a choice. We're at the point where we have humans advocating n…
The alternative is to let humans do everything. Think about what that entails. I have seen enough human incompetence that AI incompetence is beginning to look quite favorable. AI performance, at least, goes up generation to generation. If you've ever faced minimum wage workers, you know that they are, at best, consistently the same level of awful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a strange definition of religion, to basically mean anything that isn't science. Are all aesthetics and ethics a matter of religion?
People believe it because they learn to believe it in childhood. People who don’t believe it are bad. If you even question it, people get angry and say you’re bad. People support wars against other people solely on the basis of their disagreement with it. People think we should spread it to other people. Functionally, how is that different from religion? Sure, I am using a different definition of religion because the…
In human rights or democratic rule of law?? What a preposterous notion. Precisely what separates religious belief from non-religious is the fact that the latter is dogmatic while the latter is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Religion is a lot broader than Christian fundamentalism and zealots. It's sort of like applied philosophy: how do you live a flourishing life in relationship to other people and to the god(s). Modernity has an implicit materialist worldview (matter is all that is) and an explicit rejection of the divine. However, if matter is all there is, then there is no meaning in the world. This is not a way to flourish in the wo…
The modern west is still very religious, they just switched to a new religion without a mascot. If you don’t believe me, explain to me how human rights, universal equality, democracy etc are based in science. You can’t, because they aren’t. Sorry for blaspheming. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do them, by the way, it just means that it’s our religion to do them.
How did you miss out on learning this life lesson as a child?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Computation halves in price every ~2 years so maybe in the short term but not in the long term
Even so, frontier models get bigger and more complicated, and agentic workflows consume exponentially more tokens than the simple chat windows of two years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Computation halves in price every ~2 years so maybe in the short term but not in the long term
How is that possible when the cost of memory and hard drives have gone up 3x+ in the last six months? Maybe cheaper if you're OAI or one of the lucky companies Nvidia is propping up. Everyone else is getting screwed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The alternative is to let humans do everything. Think about what that entails. I have seen enough human incompetence that AI incompetence is beginning to look quite favorable. AI performance, at least, goes up generation to generation. If you've ever faced minimum wage workers, you know that they are, at best, consistently the same level of awful.
How is that the alternative? That's not even the reality 100 years ago, let alone today .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> From which would you take advice, the successful entrepreneur/investor, or the nice hacker geek [?] The nice hacker geek? By the way, the Woz has a net-worth of 140MM, so he's more wealthy that the vast majority of "successful entrepreneur/investors", and also vastly more beloved than virtually all of them. In any case, that's a false dichotomy and actually the wrong question entirely.
>By the way, the Woz has a net-worth of 140MM, so he's more wealthy that the vast majority of "successful entrepreneur/investors", So are a lot of people who invested(gambled) early in Bitcoin and Tesla, that doesn't mean people should take career advice from them just because they managed to make a lot of money. But if you design and developed several successful tech products in your career, I think people should at…
The fucking things you read on this website, I swear to god.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A number of his works are better than “okay,” today. You’re welcome to view that as a moral dilemma, or not.
Not a moral dilemma to me at all personally. I separate the works from the artist. However, I find the constant barrage of purity police from all sides to be the mass media equivalent of a large boil on my butt. The whinging about AI from the left is as annoying as the whinging about DEI from the right to me. And none of that will go anywhere towards reining in surveillance capitalism and our emerging panopticon. How…
The issue of not wanting to give money to a (perceived to be) horrible person, or company, or cause seems somewhat valid to me, hence it does seem like there’s a distinction to be made between, for example, Asimov and Polanski. On the other hand, I might encourage the conflicted to question whether the fraction of a penny Polanski gets when somebody streams Chinatown really moves the needle…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a moral dilemma to me at all personally. I separate the works from the artist. However, I find the constant barrage of purity police from all sides to be the mass media equivalent of a large boil on my butt. The whinging about AI from the left is as annoying as the whinging about DEI from the right to me. And none of that will go anywhere towards reining in surveillance capitalism and our emerging panopticon. How…
This issue of separating the artist from his work is eternal and the comparison with some of these more contemporary issues you’re upset about rings a little hollow. The issue of not wanting to give money to a (perceived to be) horrible person, or company, or cause seems somewhat valid to me, hence it does seem like there’s a distinction to be made between, for example, Asimov and Polanski. On the other hand, I might…
https://deadline.com/2023/04/roman-polanski-rape-victim-sama...