a technology that hurts humanity in every conceivable way and poisons the environment.
That's how I feel about Bitcoin, which, by the way, STILL consumes more energy in its datacenters than AI.
MangoCats
joined 2 years ago
they do a lot of the same things.
It works, just like marketing nasty tasting bubbly acid sugar syrup using cute polar bears at christmastime worked in the 70s. It was "the real thing" and one of the most valuable companies on the planet, based on nothing but delivery of that nasty unhealthy stuff.
I think if you unpack the roots of the BOGO, it pushes a lot of the same reward buttons as nicotine delivery death sticks.
Chainsaws can be used well, or poorly. People who don't know what they are doing with chainsaws are much more likely to experience bad results.
Pretty much by definition, nobody knew how to use LLMs at all ten years ago. Most people who are using them today have less than a year's experience in use case fields that didn't exist 2 years ago.
Chernobyl spread significant radiation over 8 million people with effects lasting for decades / generations. It spread detectable radiation across most of the globe.
I truly feel for the tragedy of the schoolgirls, but as Stalin said: one death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic. Chernobyl was a statistic level event, so many individual tragedies that people can't feel them anymore.
the threats are all existential at the moment.
I think you mean hypothetical. Possibly hypothetically existential.
The moment something happens all the people who are already not happy with AI will suddenly have a threat to point to
and hopefully, that something won't be an existential threat.
a sentient entity making an error
The popular fictional scenario is the sentient entity not making an error, but making a rational well informed correct assessment - from its non-human perspective. How much power you allow such entities to have is a very real concern. Not that we have seen such entities in operation, yet.
Biowarfare has been publicized as something evil geniuses can cook up in a garage for decades now. I think that narrative has been perpetuated by the governments and other large organizations which run clandestine labs...
The interesting aspect is that AI companies are huge, too big to fail as they say, so the courts historically have tended to pin responsibility downstream from those whales more on the users of their products. The question in today's environment is: will victims of AI abuse be blamed, like jaywalkers, or will the blame fall further upstream on the AI operators who are profiting from its use, thereby exposing their profits to assignment as damages to the injured.
The problem is: people have been shirking responsibility and blaming "the computer" for decisions since there have been decisions coming out of computers. This is not a unique story.
Giving AI responsibility is like giving a chainsaw responsibility for the trees it cuts and where they fall.
Anybody using AI then turning around and pointing at it saying "it wasn't me, it was the tool!!!" is just as culpable as someone who sets their car on cruise control at 80 miles per hour and proceeds to take a nap.
In Soviet Chernobyl, the power plant design tests YOU.
That's called professional pen testing. And, I agree, I do believe that it is actually possible to close all the gaps.