metermatic26

Personal data is highly sensitive. There is a very real need for people to keep their data private.

But data is also capital. And we’re locked in a very real struggle between corporate powers trying to secure ownership over our personal data and civil society trying to protect their privacy.

I can’t stress enough just how dangerous it is, especially given current world events, that big tech seems to appropriate personal data about people’s social networks, jobs, daily commutes, shopping habits, sexual preferences, political views etc.

JC, every other post on here is about data centers, Elon Musk or White House legislation. Can’t we talk about technology instead of US politics?

Should post this under \leopardsatemyface

Overinvested in unproven technology and worried about stock prices?

Fascinating. I wasn’t aware of the difference in model approach. Thanks for your insights 👍🏻

You’d think that something that can be copied that easily by your competitors , wouldn’t be valued at hundreds of millions of dollars.

Fair point. But how many more people tried and failed because they didn’t have the level of skill required to see it through.

I mean I’m not a dumb guy, but if I started tomorrow I wouldn’t be able to just build a rocket out of the blue. It takes time and patience to master the skills needed to pull it off.

But if I had someone at my side to guide me through the proces, then I’d probably succeed a lot better and faster.

And that goes for the ten of thousands of people all around the world trying their hand at these things.

Anyone recognize this one? My manager is a fuckin’ retard. I mean the guy is seriously just to dumb for his job.

Why am I mentioning this? Because my manager is literally the only one in our 12 men team who uses AI.

And he uses it constantly…all the fucking time…even to have it explain emails to him. But the thing is, LLM’s can’t grasp the technical details or the nuances of my work. So when my manager uses AI to respond to emails or uses it to prepare plans or presentations, its literally gibberish. And when you ask him what point he’s actually trying to make, he gets irritated 🤣

Before you ask, yes I am already on the hunt for a new job…

I’m a data and AI specialist, so no…I’m not scared of technology :p

I’ll explain my argument: AI is technology that can be used for software automation. Neither software in general or AI are dangerous technologies in and of themselves. Just as nuclear energy or jet propulsion are not dangerous technologies in and of themselves.

But the application of technology is never ever neutral, so rules and regulations are always necessary to dictate the context and the conditions in which technology is being applied.

And therein lies the issue: Big Tech is allowing their models and platforms to be used to create applications that are inherently harmful. For example, how is it not a problem when people create deepfake porn of their underaged ex-girlfriend?

And mind you this is not an oversight: tech companies know well in advance what their models can be used for and the issues themselves can be fixed easily. They simply chose to accept the damage inflicted unto individuals and security and stability of society as a whole.

All so they can get ahead of the crowd and maximize their market share. If anything, this article is a testament to this clash of interests between society and big tech.

Yeah, but the thing is…there is absolutely nothing stopping Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas from developing their own AI.

The technology needed to develop AI that can sabotage infrastructure, spread disinformation, develop autonomous weapons etc is already out there.

Whatever advantage the US and Israel had when it comes to military applications of AI, is quickly disappearing.

Let me put this in perspective:

In many countries its against the law to freely distribute plans for making neurotoxins or bombs, because the democratization of such knowledge would lower the threshold for people to commit acts of terror.

Likewise the plans for making a hydrogen bomb are a close kept government secret, because nuclear proliferation increases the likelihood of radiological accidents or even nuclear war.

How is it then that AI companies freely publish their AI models to any and all actors willing to pay them? Even though they know that this technology lowers the threshold for bad actors to commit cybercrime, engage in cyberwarfare, spread misinformation, commit fraud, manipulate markets and whatnot? The unregulated democratization of AI exposes societies to unprecedented risks.

Is it any wonder the public holds a negative view on AI?

Wait, so its not the actual event and ensuing casualties that have AI researchers spooked, but the fact that it might cause the public to turn against AI?