Earlier quoted context omitted.
> - you, chained on your sofa, watching ads "tailored-made by AI for you" Blipverts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blipvert
I approve this message.
Username checks out.
Do you want the US to "win" AI?
81–90 of 114 posts
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#82The brain rot required to call the EA people evil while praising the guy that did agree to give the Pentagon autonomous weapons...
The EA people who give money directly to poor people are great. The EA people who decided to spend oodles of money working on AI ostensibly to prevent an insane thought experiment and then converted that effort into a for-profit corporation while insisting that actually giving money to the poor is bad because you'll have greater future utility by spending it on AI are worthy of scorn.
> The EA people who decided to spend oodles of money working on AI ostensibly to prevent an insane thought experiment and then converted that effort into a for-profit corporation while insisting that actually giving money to the poor is bad because you'll have greater future utility by spending it on AI are worthy of scorn.
That was the e/acc folks though. Different acronym, even though they were a spinoff from the original EA folks.
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#83I want open weights models to win AI, don't care if Satan himself does the training and finetuning.
That would be nice. Kinda seems unlikely though, doesn’t it?
The way they’re made is so resource intensive it kinda feels like saying “the best free and open source nuclear powered aircraft carrier.”
We get whatever the massively well funded companies are inclined to give us.
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#84I want open weights models to win AI, don't care if Satan himself does the training and finetuning.
That would be nice. Kinda seems unlikely though, doesn’t it? The way they’re made is so resource intensive it kinda feels like saying “the best free and open source nuclear powered aircraft carrier.” We get whatever the massively well funded companies are inclined to give us.
There is an entire host of Chinese free models out there proving you wrong
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're an US citizen, I would understand why. If you're from elsewhere, looking at how both countries deal with foreign policies, perhaps the answer requires some serious reflection.
Yeah, there's nothing about the current America I want to "win" AI; nor the people leading it. I'm sure China has the same type of leadership, but they've yet to threaten to nuke a whole civilization. Obviously, we want to be in the middle between what America represents and China, and that's currently Europe.
China is fundamentally anti-elite. It is the whole principle the PRC was founded on. China does not have "the same type of leadership" at all. It has well-raised technocratic cadres who compete within the system, not above it unlike the US.
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#86I suppose I'd rather the US wins AI as opposed to, say, China
The real winner in this subthread: negative polarization. It's kind of incredible to watch. Show people two actors, point out the bad things one has done, and they instantly apply "enemy of my enemy is my friend" logic and turn into China boosters. Without even considering that there might be, say, other options. China provides some great manufactured goods (I may well buy a Chinese car) and runs an ordered society w…
> The real winner in this subthread: negative polarization.
People being against their local elites is largely a good thing. That’s what the China boosting is mostly about.
> It's kind of incredible to watch. Show people two actors, point out the bad things one has done, and they instantly apply "enemy of my enemy is my friend" logic and turn into China boosters. Without even considering that there might be, say, other options.
People aren’t cardboard cutouts with preprogrammed opinions. They are answering a pretty much yes-or-no question without necessarily giving all the reasons. And it can be tempting to say No to the US Hegemon on an American website, just as an off the cuff of my chair remark.
(And the person you responded to did the same, but with a US-positive response.)
And people do not necessarily sit around wishing for a better hegemon, either. But here’s the pro-USA (“foreign” policy version) script we’ve been seeing.
- America is a force for good
- ... and it if isn’t a force for good then it is a better hegemon than China
- ... and if it isn’t a better hegemon than China for you foreigners then it’s a better hegemon for me, an American
- ... and if it isn’t a better hegemon for you, poor American, it’s a better hegemon for me, rich American
- ... and anyway there will by necessity be some hegemon so you have to choose one
And they think to themselves. Okay. Going with this lesser evil hegemon logic I choose China.
Which again doesn’t mean that they actively want any hegemon at all.
> But because it doesn't have a free press, you and I (and most Chinese citizens) can't see what the downsides are. They're politely but firmly swept under the rug. And if you get on the wrong side of the "ordered society", it can go very badly for you.
I’m a blank slate on this so whatever you say. Most things I’ve heard about China are from the West. And the US in particular. Now recently there has been much more pro-China propaganda or whatever you call it. In terms of tech, infrastructure, even about being a supposed good hegemon to African countries or wherever.
> Perhaps the real lesson is how the American right have so successfully poisoned the idea of competitive politics and free speech that a literal one party state looks better than .. whatever the hell is going on over there. People would opt to give up their right to politics simply in order to not be subjected to politics.
No, you ask them a yes/no question and they choose the lesser evil!
I have no idea about civic engagement in China. No doubt America will tell me that it’s some kind of Black Mirror but literally real life.
Meanwhile in the West we have democracy, in our names. We have civic engagement. Yes yes yes. It’s not undemocratic. But it’s still dominated by the rich. Pick up a political science textbook and they talk about democracy in the West in real terms. As an elite-dominated institution with people-powered ornamentation.
People are not caricatures that either want the American military boot or the Chinese Han supremacy (or whatever is up with ethnicity in China).[1] But if you ask them if they want the American boot, guess what can happen? Them expressing displeasures with their overlords.
[1] This was apparently one of the super downsides of Chinese supremacy according to some corners of this thread. Ethnic majority racism.
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a chart of investment by patriotic US citizens seeking to better the country such that the country "wins" .. more like a chart of military and motte and bailey investments made by individual feuding Norman clans each seeking to be the last castle standing and in control of all the throttle points and gates across the country and ideally the world.
This is a good time to reflect on the etymology of "Banana Republic" [0]. I suspect most people don't see fruit companies as a major threat, but they'll kill and ravage to get people cheap bananas. This idea that the morals of the people making investments is in any way relevant is a bit of a misframe. Investors are capable of any evil, the default position is of surprise if one of them is investing out of some sense…
> The point of the economic system is it channels some of the most ghoulish and horrible people to do good as an accidental side effect of their mad rush to wealth and power. Works really well, on average everyone wins.
When there is a functioning justice system that enforces the law, rather than a corrupt oligarchy/kleptocracy/kakistocracy.
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be nice. Kinda seems unlikely though, doesn’t it? The way they’re made is so resource intensive it kinda feels like saying “the best free and open source nuclear powered aircraft carrier.” We get whatever the massively well funded companies are inclined to give us.
There is an entire host of Chinese free models out there proving you wrong
Yeah, when Alibaba decides to give us a new, lower end Qwen.
They’re not coming from an altruistic guy with a couple gpus in his basement.
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#89I don't have any comment on the post but that chart is fascinating. Both because the US bar is comparatively way off to the right. But also what's up in say, Belgium re: AI?
My old (US) company's AI expert was in Belgium for reasons but the country being on the leader board surprises me.
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#90Anyone "winning" AI means that most of us will "lose".