he believes there are limited niche use cases for AI, with specific stipulations about how it should be used. so no, he’s not an abolitionist.
his most common catch phrase is “seize the means of computation!” which suggests he believes that powerful technologies like AI should be socially owned and directed resource. it’s a nuanced take that AI absolutists don’t like.
To be fair, even the “AI absolutists” are typically against corporate AI and big tech, and less so LLMs as a technology/research topic. The application and societal implications are the problem, not the underlying math.
I guess I can see that. I mean, as much as we want the tech absolutely will never go away (until electricity goes away, which may be sooner than we all think), but if we are gonna be forced to have it I want it owned by the people.
he believes there are limited niche use cases for AI, with specific stipulations about how it should be used. so no, he’s not an abolitionist.
his most common catch phrase is “seize the means of computation!” which suggests he believes that powerful technologies like AI should be socially owned and directed resource. it’s a nuanced take that AI absolutists don’t like.
To be fair, even the “AI absolutists” are typically against corporate AI and big tech, and less so LLMs as a technology/research topic. The application and societal implications are the problem, not the underlying math.
I guess I can see that. I mean, as much as we want the tech absolutely will never go away (until electricity goes away, which may be sooner than we all think), but if we are gonna be forced to have it I want it owned by the people.