AI has some legit uses but the hype around it is mostly VC’s throwing money at buzzwords while the actual tech is nowhere near the “AGI revolution” they keep promising us lol.
But can we at least be thankful that it shifted focus from augmented reality? Prior to AI, the buzz was around things like the metaverse and digital avatars in your teams meetings.
Even crap AI is more useful than avatars in teams.
Digital Avatars in teams arent actively destructive to the internet, the environment, and people’s grasp on reality.
I think you’re universalising a personal grievance, without fully accounting for the impacts of Metaverse bullshit, which was never practical or feasible to begin with, and the AI Apocalypse sweeping the internet
Well, I was trying to bring a little humor to the conversation by just saying at least as a silver lining is that this other stupid crap is gone now.
If the AI “revolution” never came, I bet a thread just like this one would exist for metaverse or whatever saying how it’s destroying the internet. And think about it, entering an entire world just to hold this conversation where all users are known and conversations recorded…kind of like AI scraping.
You can see his it could get just as bad or worse. Hint: its not the technology that’s the problem, its the companies behind them - those wouldn’t be any different.
I’m not trying to downplay AI, I’m just being realistic of the world we live in and trying to not be so doom and gloom every second of the day.
The crap they’re promoting it for also showcases the direction they’re developing it for which is an utterly depressing, unsustainable and impractical one. It’s frustrating to see how much money is invested (and ultimately burned) to actively destroy the economy and create problems rather than fixing some.
Duh
Every tech buzzword is a grift to try to rationalize endless exponential growth in a world where that’s just impossible
chatbots like gpt and gemini learn from conversations with veiwers, so what we need is a virus that will pretend to be a user and flood its chats with pro racism arguments and sexist remarks, which will rub off on the chatbots making them unacceptable for public use
Been there. Done that
Yeah. GROK and Twitter have entered the chat. Seriously though, we’ve regressed pretty far in what the general public deems acceptable.
what did you do?
deleted by creator
I’ve met the author IRL. He’s quite famous in his niche
Well not exactly but completely misunderstood.
Everyone who actually knows about AI is familiar with the alignment and takeoff problems.
(Play this if you need a quick summary
https://www.decisionproblem.com/paperclips/index2.html
)
So whenever someone says, we are making AI, the response should be “oh fuck no” (using bullets and fire if required)
New tagging and auto-completion is fine (there is probably a whole space of new tools that can come out of the AI research field; that doesn’t risk human extinction)
We are so far away from a paperclip maximizer scenario that I can’t take anyone concerned about that seriously.
We have nothing even approaching true reasoning, despite all the misuse going on that would indicate otherwise.
Alignment? Takeoff? None of our current technologies under the AI moniker come anywhere remotely close to any reason for concern, and most signs point to us rapidly approaching a wall with our current approaches.
Each new version from the top companies in the space right now has less and less advancement in capability compared to the last, with costs growing at a pace where “exponentially” doesn’t feel like an adequate descriptor.
There’s probably lateral improvements to be made, but outside of taping multiple tools together there’s not much evidence for any more large breakthroughs in capability.
I agree currently technology is extremely unlikely to achieve general intelligence but my expression was that we never should try to achieve AGI; it is not worth the risk until after we solve the alignment problem.
“alignment problem” is what CEOs use as a distraction to take responsibility away from their grift and frame the issue as a technical problem. That’s another word that make you lose any credibility
I think we are talking past each other. Alignment with human values is important; otherwise we end up with a paper clip optimizer wanting humans only as a feedstock of atoms or deciding to pull a “With Folded Hands” situation.
None of the “AI” companies are even remotely interested in or working on this legitimate concern.
Unfortunately game theory says we’re gonna do it whenever it’s technologically possible.
Only for zero sum games