71–80 of 169 posts
“AI” eating itself is the best outcome for everyone. It’s a mass energy balance. The inputs equal the outputs; garbage in, garbage out.
Why would you not root for AI? Its potential to improve humanity is huge even if there are potential bad sides. Some People bunching crypto with AI on the usefulness scale is quite ridiculous
“AI” eating itself is the best outcome for everyone. It’s a mass energy balance. The inputs equal the outputs; garbage in, garbage out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the current crop of AI at least, the upside will almost entirely be captured by a handful of rich elites who will gain even more leverage over workers. Virtually no business owner pays someone well for any reason other than they have to in order to make more money themselves. If LLMs don't flame out it will be like the dawn of offshoring except wider scale and without the upside of poor people in other countries…
This is technology in general though. Technology first benefits the rich and causes people to lose their jobs, but then in the next generation, people get different jobs and everyone’s life is better. Technology is a double edge sword in every way.
“AI” eating itself is the best outcome for everyone. It’s a mass energy balance. The inputs equal the outputs; garbage in, garbage out.
Why would you not root for AI? Its potential to improve humanity is huge even if there are potential bad sides. Some People bunching crypto with AI on the usefulness scale is quite ridiculous
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We will know AGI is starting to exist when driverless cars are everywhere.
A "general" intelligence is one that can do tasks it wasn't explicitly trained to do. The first self driving cars (that already exist) are powered by an AI that can only drive cars, so it's not general. Also if self driving cars are everywhere then we won't have AGI, because real AGI largely does away with the need for cars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also happens with wikipedia. Later edits with web references are much more prone to citogenesis, while an early edit with a web reference is probably clear, even if the link is dead. Even printed references can be based on wikipedia now
> …citogenesis… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reporting#Circular_re...
E.g. someone writes a made up citogenesis article on Wikipedia before the xkcd comic was drawn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is technology in general though. Technology first benefits the rich and causes people to lose their jobs, but then in the next generation, people get different jobs and everyone’s life is better. Technology is a double edge sword in every way.
Coming from genuine curiosity, what jobs don’t compete with an AI that’s designed to mimic and surpass human capability?
Jobs which are specifically about being a human seem like they can't be automated, like actors, waiters, athletes, sex workers.
I sincerely doubt anyone would watch or care about fake AI generated sports.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Languages at fine granularity and narrative complexes at high granularity. Some people explicitly refer to stories as the most efficient compression mechanisms there is, by a large margin. There is a reason the Hutter prize is what it is. Which, in a supreme irony for the positivist types, rationally entails that folk tales and the Bible (gasp) are the most valuable data there is.
Well, not necessarily, because while it may be highly compressed data shaped by a long history, we don't know if that data is actually any good. It could be the compounded misapprehensions of all the peoples that contributed to it. Just the fact that something holds a lot of highly efficiently compressed data doesn't mean it's actually good data. You might argue that if it's old and still common today then it must ha…
We know the data survived a narrative/biological co-evolution distributed process spanning thousands of generations over many millennia. It doesn't make it perfect, but it makes it pretty darn good with high likelihood, especially when compared with narrative complexes invented yesterday, which have yet to withstand the test of time and which show measurable signs of dysfunction.
See also the Lindy effect, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect "the future life expectancy of some non-perishable things, like a technology or an idea, is proportional to their current age"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you not root for AI? Its potential to improve humanity is huge even if there are potential bad sides. Some People bunching crypto with AI on the usefulness scale is quite ridiculous
I will root for AI a lot more readily when we have a good alternative (UBI?) for people whos jobs are being displaced faster than they can retrain Y'all cheerleaders are going to create an underclass the likes of which you've never seen before. I hope they take up torches and pitchforks
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you not root for AI? Its potential to improve humanity is huge even if there are potential bad sides. Some People bunching crypto with AI on the usefulness scale is quite ridiculous
For the current crop of AI at least, the upside will almost entirely be captured by a handful of rich elites who will gain even more leverage over workers. Virtually no business owner pays someone well for any reason other than they have to in order to make more money themselves. If LLMs don't flame out it will be like the dawn of offshoring except wider scale and without the upside of poor people in other countries…