Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • that website gives me ocular stigmata
  • It'd be funny if someone cracked open an AI data center and it turned out be a dungeon full of people tied to computers, Sims goblin style

    ...maybe that's what those Chinese scam centers in Cambodia were doing?

  • It’s funny but just to state the obvious so no one is confused, that’s impossible.
  • As usual, the most ridiculous explanation turns out to have already happened: https://www.webworm.co/zach/
  • AI is great.
  • I think tl;dr

    >Now, you can think of large language model AI — the kind that’s on everybody’s mind — as a whole bunch of people whose work was combined into a single document like Wikipedia.

    which is sort of true, but there's more to it.

  • That's a softball interview. More hard questions would help.

    Here's one good insight, though.

    JARON LANIER: Yeah, okay, so look, the thing about very rich and powerful people is that their wealth and power still depends on a mass population that accepts some system in which their wealth and power is defined. And so if they lose enough popular legitimacy and support, no matter how central they are, they fall. And that’s happened repeatedly in history, and it’s really not any different now.

    I wonder if the sudden political opposition to AI comes from the realization that it may replace "rich and powerful people". Really, when you look at Trump's appointees, it's a low bar.

    (I met Lanier when he was demoing his first VR system. Head tracking lag was about a second. Turn head, wait for image to catch up. Autodesk fooled around with VR a bit in the late 1980s/early 1990s, but concluded that CAD required precision work and VR was like trying to do precision work in ski gloves. That level of VR can be seen in Johny Mnemonic, which had some Autodesk assistance.[1]. Even today, you can't put a nut on a bolt in VR without a cheat.)

    [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X24aE99TL0

  • The more interesting question is what happens once we replace manual labor with artificially intelligent robots and we arrive at a place where 99 % of human labor got eliminated. How do you maintain civil order? Every country is built on the premise that you have to “earn your keep” but what when that’s no longer true? Think about it, no labor, only capital. What will the people owning the capital demand of people that don’t own any? They won’t be useful to them in any way. I expect something like forced reduction of fertility for regulars to depopulate countries, while hyper rich individuals will extend their life spans and become immortal. And I don’t mean they will really survive but someone like Elon Musk will have their consciousness mapped to an AI and will instate that AI as their official heir. That sounds crazy but they will totally go for it just listen at what Peter Thiel is spouting in terms of immortality and becoming godlike. Hope people will have enough left to say to prevent that but right now it feels we’re going hardcore towards that scenario.
  • This argument is like saying people don't kill people, their parents do. As people wouldn't be who they are without their parents..

    This isn't the guns don't kill people, people kill people debate - guns aren't autonomous. AI is.

  • GLC - Guns Don't Kill People... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Mb0t4XyEAF0
  • OK but then what is the non-negative position you have against this? That in fact AI, in the cultural trope sense, is real? That we forcing sentient beings to generate SaaS products faster and faster? Keeping them in some dark hell so we can exploit them? Not even paying them?
  • AI is as autonomous as a dishwasher: someone’s in charge of keeping the power plug in, and of maintaining it.
  • I think the argument rather is that there is not such thing as AI that is not human-alike. The traits that AI exposes, if I get the point made here correctly, are traits that existed in the training material, even though not evident for the human eye. It is a mirror-like reflection of humanity's traits found in the source material, an Egregore* of a sort.

    The intelligence emerging, or whatever is emerging, more or less follows human traits, the CoT exposed is very human-like etc. Even though we should not anthropomorphize AI as being sentient or conscious or having a soul, etc., we have to remember that the source material is still not alien writing, or concepts that came from Sirius or emerged from a wormhole.

    The concern is really nobody reads (or have ever read) 77 TBs of information in order to summarize the most evident traits in it, and there is a fair chance, that where humanity stands today, there are so many bad/damaging traits recorded in this corpus. Then there is a chance the most important features are on a level (or have dimensionality) that is incomprehensible, that humans are unable to reason about (or only few can), because such amount of information is very hard to reason about, or because we don't usually facilitate fractal dimensions when we reason about text and everyday concepts,... or something even more bizarre.

    * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egregore * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_dimension

  • AI is not autonomous. Somebody has to provide resources and execution for AI to do anything.
  • AI is not a child. It is a machine. If you connect it to something that can be used to kill people, you just created a gun or an equivalent of a bomb.

    Yes, people kill people and use ai as tool.

    If you unleash a drone that will fly to a random place and detonate, you just commited a terrorist attack or gross criminal negligence. It is the same thing.

  • People conflate two very different senses of “autonomous”. One basically means capable of reacting to things automatically without a person in the loop. Lots of computer systems are autonomous in that sense, and have been so for decades. The other sense is more like “accountable”, i.e. it’s a real player on some stage, like a country or a person, capable of governing its own affairs.

    One day it may make sense to hold software accountable for its own actions, but we are nowhere near that point.

    When OpenAI creates software that performs crimes, what’s actually happened is that OpenAI has performed crimes using software (whether intentionally or through negligence). People need to stop falling for the anthropomorphic PR spin.

  • AI is not in the least autonomous. When was the last time you downloaded a model and it suddenly decided to book you a hotel room? AI doesn't do anything until you ask it to. No, actually, AI is not even a program, it's just a set of technologies and algorithms. It's like saying bubble sort is autonomous...

    A harness running inference on a LLM is simply a program that must be invoked with some parameters and thus ultimately a tool, no matter how powerful. The blame is always on who's using the tool. We should not seek to flee from our responsibility.

  • There is not anything every word/label is a human construct intentionally or unintentionally. We can take this as far as we want.
  • It's AI's Fault. It's AI doing the horrible things to humans. It's AI stealing your wealth. It's AI lying you to. It's AI being unethical. It's AI having the moral issues. It's AI that could destroy humanity. It's AI that's using up all your water. It's AI consuming the majority of the resources. It's AI hiding what it does and how it works. It's AI that's not transparent and accountable. It's AI that's not responsible. It's the AI making decisions. It's AI leading to war. It's the AI distracting you. It's the AI.

    It's not a human.

    Says the human, masquerading as AI.

  • Computer says no.
  • I realized that this is another function of the doom mongering and hand waving: if people buy it then they can get out of liability for what their stuff does.

    If I build a machine on my property and it harms someone else or their property, I can get sued.

    But if I hand wave and claim it’s alive and “I’ve lost control” then…

    Maybe we should call this gambit the “Frankenstein defense.” It’s bullshit. Your AI, you’re liable for whatever it does.

    by api