Large Language Models are the form of so-called “AI” that’s being crammed into everything at our expense.
The stuff that’s actually useful, like engineering and bioscience models, are not getting trillions in investments in the hopes that they’ll render the majority of the population unemployable.
That’s the most visible thing. It’s not the only thing. And the cool thing about AI models is that they can be run together in various ways to commitment each other. It’s not a zero sum game
When people complain about “AI” they aren’t talking about aerodynamics simulators, they’re talking about LLMs built on stolen content for the express purpose of stealing jobs and recommendation algorithms designed to push people into fascist politics for the engagement numbers. Those are entirely a zero-sum game where corporate gains can only be achieved by consumer losses.
Because people are largely ignorant and latch onto buzzwords that the media repeats endlessly without understanding what’s going on behind the scenes.
Fascist Recommendation engines existed long before any of this LLM business.
Stopping technological progress because bad people might do bad things with it, is attacking the problem the wrong way. Stop the bad people, not the technology. Replacing jobs/reducing the burden on people to labor isn’t a bad thing if we can prevent all the riches going to a few wealthy owners.
Because people are largely ignorant and latch onto buzzwords that the media repeats endlessly without understanding what’s going on behind the scenes.
I’m not “people”, I’m a sysadmin for a Fortune 500 company that has to put up with my bosses trying to shoehorn LLMs into everything.
Do not presume to talk down to me on this topic, I’ve been complaining about so-called “AI” chatbots since Eliza.
Stopping technological progress because bad people might do bad things with it, is attacking the problem the wrong way.
LLMs aren’t “progress”, they’re multidimensional maps of human language use. Interesting from an academic perspective, but not useful for any real work.
Stop the bad people, not the technology.
You sound like a communist.
Replacing jobs/reducing the burden on people to labor isn’t a bad thing if we can prevent all the riches going to a few wealthy owners.
If AI can push us to be post scarcity, capitalism stops making sense.
I’m not a communist in terms of present day reality. Not that the first thing you tried to label as communism was even remotely related to it. It sounds like you just slap that label on things as a way to dismiss them in your mind.
If AI can push us to be post scarcity, capitalism stops making sense.
Why would “AI” businesses want that? Without scarcity, they wouldn’t be able to exploit unmet needs for profit.
The idea that capitalist enterprises would destroy their own shareholder value by rendering themselves obsolete is a delusion of the highest order.
I’m not a communist in terms of present day reality.
Nah, you just imagine that businesses will gladly share the profits of their “labor saving” inventions rather than jealously keeping as much of it for themselves as possible. If you think you aren’t a commie then you’re just fooling yourself.
Not that the first thing you tried to label as communism was even remotely related to it. It sounds like you just slap that label on things as a way to dismiss them in your mind.
Says the guy who wants companies to share the profits they normally take for their shareholders, lol. Go join a union, commie.
Wow. Reading comprehension is not your strong suit. Nowhere did I say companies would do this willingly. Not did I say we were that close to this being relevant. Don’t get too distracted trying to find ways to not discuss the actual point of the conversation though.
Large Language Models are the form of so-called “AI” that’s being crammed into everything at our expense.
The stuff that’s actually useful, like engineering and bioscience models, are not getting trillions in investments in the hopes that they’ll render the majority of the population unemployable.
That’s the most visible thing. It’s not the only thing. And the cool thing about AI models is that they can be run together in various ways to commitment each other. It’s not a zero sum game
Dude, wtf are you talking about?
When people complain about “AI” they aren’t talking about aerodynamics simulators, they’re talking about LLMs built on stolen content for the express purpose of stealing jobs and recommendation algorithms designed to push people into fascist politics for the engagement numbers. Those are entirely a zero-sum game where corporate gains can only be achieved by consumer losses.
Because people are largely ignorant and latch onto buzzwords that the media repeats endlessly without understanding what’s going on behind the scenes.
Fascist Recommendation engines existed long before any of this LLM business.
Stopping technological progress because bad people might do bad things with it, is attacking the problem the wrong way. Stop the bad people, not the technology. Replacing jobs/reducing the burden on people to labor isn’t a bad thing if we can prevent all the riches going to a few wealthy owners.
I’m not “people”, I’m a sysadmin for a Fortune 500 company that has to put up with my bosses trying to shoehorn LLMs into everything.
Do not presume to talk down to me on this topic, I’ve been complaining about so-called “AI” chatbots since Eliza.
LLMs aren’t “progress”, they’re multidimensional maps of human language use. Interesting from an academic perspective, but not useful for any real work.
You sound like a communist.
So you are a communist, then?
If AI can push us to be post scarcity, capitalism stops making sense.
I’m not a communist in terms of present day reality. Not that the first thing you tried to label as communism was even remotely related to it. It sounds like you just slap that label on things as a way to dismiss them in your mind.
Why would “AI” businesses want that? Without scarcity, they wouldn’t be able to exploit unmet needs for profit.
The idea that capitalist enterprises would destroy their own shareholder value by rendering themselves obsolete is a delusion of the highest order.
Nah, you just imagine that businesses will gladly share the profits of their “labor saving” inventions rather than jealously keeping as much of it for themselves as possible. If you think you aren’t a commie then you’re just fooling yourself.
Says the guy who wants companies to share the profits they normally take for their shareholders, lol. Go join a union, commie.
Wow. Reading comprehension is not your strong suit. Nowhere did I say companies would do this willingly. Not did I say we were that close to this being relevant. Don’t get too distracted trying to find ways to not discuss the actual point of the conversation though.