Was double-tapping a school not enough?
It was a school of some desert people far away. So it’s basically irrelevant to the citizen of The Great US Empire.
Not so much an AI thing as much as an American thing. Americans and Israelis love doing that shit.
AI vibecoded nuclear plant. What could go wrong? You just need to add “no nuclear meltdown” at the end of the prompt.
There is info that Microsoft vibecoded an OS…
Wasn’t that just the plot of N.U.K.E.E.?
I’ll worry about ‘AI’ when something that can legitimately be mistaken as intelligence is demonstrated.
In the meantime, these explosively imprecise, statistically luke-warm, grey goo extrusion sphincters need to be exclusively opt-in, and not forced on anyone who hasn’t explicitly consented to a lobotomy.
Issue is, they’re already trying to use it for things it shouldn’t be used for…
Name one thing it should be used for, where there’s not a better, lower-cost, lower-risk alternative.
I’d say “You got me!”, but I legit having an issue with finding a usecase for LLMs.
Why wait? What is with people trying to act so slick and cool?
Yes, it sucks, but it’s a) being used as if it’s intelligent, which is arguably much worse, and b) going to eventually get to a point where it’s at least not terrible(at its job, specifically, as it’s pretty bad for a lot of things).
For a personal reason, I’m worried about it because it’s very likely filtering my CV based on a work gap that’s only getting worse because my CV is getting filtered. It’s not intelligent, but HR companies and departments are using it for that anyway.
It’s already not bad for certain specific, niche applications. Check out PlantNet. It’s awesome. You can take a picture of a plant, and it’ll identify it for you. No micro-transactions; you don’t even have to log in. It just works.
Obviously, that isn’t one of the applications of Machine Learning that people have a problem with. It’s the LLMs filtering out your resume or spying on you or producing slop.
going to eventually get to a point where it’s at least not terrible
That is far from inevitable, and that’s even more true if you’re talking about existing LLM technology.
Don’t worry about “AI”, worry about the idiots who will give the imprecise statistical output extruder a gun.
Yeah, this article is promoting the doomsday AI myth which is the narrative that these companies want us to go with, because it makes their products seem powerful. In reality, people are already turning against this technology en masse — not because they’re afraid it’ll turn into Skynet, but because it sucks shit.
Like any other toxic ingredient, anything made with even an iota of AI-generated content in it should be flagged, and it should be mandatory for sites to provide an easily user-accessible way to filter that horseshit out.
Data is often called the new oil, but I’d argue it more closely resembles uranium.
LLM’s are like asbestos, a carcinogen later generations will need to carefully remove from the environment they’ve inherited.
What is currently labelled as slop will more accurately be treated like irradiated sludge.
How about they stop building the torment nexus?
Torment does not create torment. It’s being created by the torment factory within the nexus. Nexus was not valued.
Are these “top ai researchers” real people?
These top AI researchers are just investment bankers. So no, not real people
Real grifters.
the founding father of modern ‘civilisation’
It certainly would explain some of Musk’s and Thiel’s insane brain farts.
Only a matter of time. We don’t need to worry about Terminator and Skynet. We need worry about everything going from engineered to automated cargo cult slop. All run on massive datacenters controlled by a few mega corporation that everyone is hopelessly dependent on and can’t imagine working without. The trillionaire owners of these mega corporations are hiding in bunkers waiting on one of coming calamities to happen, or just from us unwashed masses. While they buy governments and media to keep and increases their riches.
This future sucks. Can I try another one?
Edit: slopocalypse is the term
I came across this conspiracy theory the other day.
You know how back in the day, company towns had to use company scrip to make sure workers couldn’t leave?
Well, not you can be tracked by AI, and as soon as you leave your “boundaries” granted to you by your level of privilege, suddenly your bank card stops working, because that looks like a “fraudulent transaction”.
The systems are already in place, too. If I go on an impromptu road trip and spend money six states over, my bank calls me and tells me my card is being used in a weird place, and they ask if that transaction is legit. Usually I can be like “yep, let it through” and everything is fine.
What if the AI decides that in fact everything is not fine, and I don’t need to be able to spend money outside of my town?
Sounds like an argument for wallets. Digital or with cash.
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?
“Sir, our model has caused several explosions around the globe resulting in hundreds of thousands dead and people rioting against us.”
“No! MY PROFIT!”
(I wish I could add an /s.)
I miss sarcasm and satire
Watch thiel, huang, karp etc videos. As far as they are concerned we are irrelevant at best, more accurately we are in the way, and we are a waste of resources that should belong to ai.
It’s like responding to your employee losing an arm, ripped off by your tiger, and saying “I’m never going to financially recover from this.”
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?
How is it then that AI companies freely publish their AI models to any and all actors willing to pay them?
Because they can’t really do much?
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.
I think they removed it, but I watched a documentary on Netflix explaining how to make a basic nuclear bomb.
Really the only hard part is obtaining the enriched uranium. Which is, thankfully, very hard.
That knowledge is nowhere near as restricted as you think. People regularly build small thermonuclear reactors in their basements for shits and giggles. It’s not exactly cutting edge technology.
Similarly, anyone with slightly more than a passing interest in model rockets knows someone who’s been visited by the ATF, as your average solid fuel model rocket engine is basically a pipe bomb with one of the endcaps taken off.
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.
Why are you comparing a tool used for knowledge and action augmentation to weapons created for destruction? Because your statement would look dumb if you said “electric motors and encyclopedias” instead of “neurotoxins and bombs”.
I can use both electric motors and encyclopedias to inflict mass casualties against people who refuse to use them or the results of their labor, but that doesn’t make them like bombs and neurotoxins. You’re simply scared of a new technology because it’s so different.
It’s really not even so different. “AI” in the current LLM-era just tricks people into thinking it’s something fundamentally different because it can string together words in a more coherent sentence than we’re used to.
At its core, though, the whole premise of the comment you’ve replied to is the argument that knowledge is dangerous and I hope I don’t have to explain why that’s a bad argument.
it can string together words in a more coherent sentence than we’re used to
Truthiness.
Knowledge without wisdom and decent morals can be incredibly dangerous.
AI is a universe simulator that uses the fuzzy logic of language instead of hard math. It is a real-time interface between the human and thousand of years of collective knowledge and understanding. It is an epoch change, even if you remove the idea that it is a thinking being like you.
the fuzzy logic of language instead of hard math
-
There’s no evidence that natural language is based on fuzzy logic.
-
Fuzzy logic is real math.
You are talking about a statistical array that uses fuzzy logic to represent humanity’s compression of their experience of the universe. It uses language to determine the values because people used language to encode them.
Fuzzy logic was literally founded as a way to represent the concepts we naturally represent with language.
You are so far away from a solid grasp of what your are attempting to educate me on. Is this a litmus test for other idiots? Like, you can’t join the crusade unless you are “this stupid”?
-
Ai is a banana toast simulator that uses farty logic of sandwich instead of hard knock life. It is a cereal box interface between the zombie and thousands of seconds of contrived marketing and manipulation. It is a diaper change, even if you remove the asparagus it is a toilet bowl full of arsenic.
@Nouvellalia you can trick the information machine to give you pretty much any information you want, as long as you don’t care how accurate it is. So if someone lies well enough, they can either get the plans for weapons of mass destruction like @metermatic26 was talking about, or they can get incorrect plans that are incredibly dangerous to even try. If the plans are correct, they can hurt anyone they want. If the plans are incorrect, they can hurt themselves and others they don’t want to.
How do you inflict a mass casualty with encyclopedias and electric motors?
How do you get to nukes and biological weapons that kill millions without them?
True, there are more valid reasons to hate AI, like that its usage inherently degrades the livability of our only planet or that it only functions due to artistic and intellectual property theft.
However, you’re glossing over the reality that AI is already being used in weapons. It was also used by my government’s regime to illegally kidnap the president of another country, even.
Electric motors and encyclopedias are irreplaceable in weapons. All electronics are used in weapons.
Farming, fishing, and electricity inherently degrade our planet far more than AI. They should all be used sustainably, wisely, and with an eye to ecosystem health and future generations. You’ll get absolutely no argument from me there. Banning any of them or limiting their access to only the governments and corporations who are doing almost all the damage, is insanity.
When it comes to IP theft, that is a huge, non-ai problem. Again, corporations are responsible for almost all of the damage and we reap none of the benefits, even before AI was ever introduced. The problem is with how we allow corporations to copyright and restrict things for generations.
The solution is that AI, the technology that required all of humanity to contribute knowledge for it to exist, should be free for all to use. Why would IP theft be a reason to limit AI ownership to only corporations and governments? That’s completely backwards.
@Nouvellalia @7101334
> Farming, fishing, and electricity inherently degrade our planet far more than AI.Inherently? It’s just a matter of time.
Farming, fishing, and electricity inherently degrade our planet far more than AI.
They’re also necessary for existence (at least the first two, but when it comes to medical applications, really electricity too).
AI slop? Nope.
re: your 1st point: deliberately disingenuous due to scale and time. re: your 2nd point: No
I promise we won’t need shitty images of babies driving a boat with shrimp Jesus, no matter how much time passes.
Nope, we all lived just fine without farming and fishing. Then we lived just fine without industrial farming and fishing. We lived most of human existence without either, and certainly without modern medicine.
You just like those things and you don’t like AI.
Then you dress all AI applications down to “AI slop”. Which if you want to move the goalposts to “AI slop”, we can agree that it’s about as necessary as high fructose corn syrup and streaming entertainment. Do you fuss on those as hard as frivolous AI usage?
@Nouvellalia @7101334 funny how really the only argument AI boosters can make with regards to its environmental impact is “what about all the other stuff that is worse”. What about it? What about that? Look over there! Yes I’ve been concerned about all those things, for many years, because I’ve been concerned about climate change, for many years. You haven’t?
lmao that’s actually so stupid I’m not even going to bother responding
a tool used for knowledge and action augmentation
It’s a bullshit aggregator attached to a stochastic bullshit firehose.
So many of you are zealots, foaming at the mouth, mass-replying to my comments with the rancor of toadies suddenly faced with the truth that the bully they serve will replace them in a heartbeat.
If it is so useless, it’ll just fail on its own. A person who really believed this would just sit back and laugh as corporations dug their own graves.
“Why are you comparing a tool used for knowledge and action augmentation”
Surely you are joking.
Are you using the LLM to write ?
Moving the goalposts implies …
you just don’t make any sense.
This is one of the problems of AI.
The appearance of making sense, without any
actual sense making.Most of y’all sound like you’re from facebook. Like a bunch of kids who never left the curated tribalism of the schoolyard.
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.
You can’t possibly be what you claim to be. All the other problems with your argument aside, it is not trivial to make a model that is “safe” and functional at the same time. It has not been done.
The money might go away!
Butlerian Jihad incoming!
buttlerian jihad?
I feel like one could legitimately run on this platform at this point.
Sounds like what Alex Karp is saying to retail investors. A lot more people got killed by AI than by Chernobyl by the way.
The majority of the world is already against AI. These jackasses need to pull their head out of their ass and come up for air.
These jackasses need to pull their head out of their ass and come up for air.
preferably not. I want them to suffocate.
Give me Facts pulled out of your ass for 500 Alex
statistically speaking the downvotes on your comment says it all.
then again, I don’t expect anyone who supports AI to understand statistics.
Why collect statistics, when we can just create them
No worries, it seems companies are very eager to make this happen sooner than later 👍
There is a key difference, that makes the genie impossible to bottle: People can run local AI on their own machines. Fans of nuclear power can’t easily build nuclear plants in their backyard. A pity, the world could use more nuclear energy. 😔
Anyhow, I am looking forward to someday using frontier-grade AI on my PC. Just need the AI bubble to pop, so that I can afford the terrabytes of memory that would be needed to comfortably run it.
Fans of nuclear power can’t easily build nuclear plants in their backyard.
Wait… how do you imagine a world where there’s demand for frontier grade AI but also that the bubble has popped such that there’s not demand for the chips to run frontier grade AI?
I’m really confused.
The internet survived the Dotcom bubble. Many businesses died, but some survived. The glut of hardware from the dead will end up in the hands of individuals, upstart companies, and the corporations that outlived their peers.
In any case, I believe the definition of frontier AI will change, as would the hardware. My build is based on what local AI is available today, with some wiggle room left over. I believe that it is around 2030, when DDR6 and other major shifts are likely to happen, that we will see the definitions change.
In any case, a Q4 of GLM 5.2 is about 460ish gigs of VRAM+RAM. While expensive, that ain’t out of reach for an AI hobbyist.
The internet survived the Dotcom bubble. Many businesses died, but some survived. The glut of hardware from the dead will end up in the hands of individuals, upstart companies, and the corporations that outlived their peers.
And that resulted in there being 5 websites with fewer people self-hosting so I don’t know why you use that as an example of decentralization.
If there is a general demand for AI after the AI bubble like there was for the internet post dotcom bubble then people will always gravitate toward the most convenient way to get it which is through the cloud powered by someone else super computer.
Right, but what % of people are currently using/demanding inference right now?
Do you expect that % to change between now and 2030?
Unless you expect demand to decrease, I don’t really see how the pricing of the hardware will decrease.
Let’s say the Pets.com of the AI world ends up going bankrupt and their RAM hits the market. Do you expect that the demand for that RAM will be negligible such that pricing returns to earlier levels?
Your predictive model relies on companies that have hardware going out of business and then other people buying up that hardware, but isn’t accounting for the levels of demand that the market will have for that secondhand hardware even if it ends up existing from failed firms.
Unless the demand shifts, the more likely scenario is that companies going out of business will be able to sell off their RAM at higher prices than they bought it at.
There’d need to be a significant inference memory reduction advance (possible) coupled with stagnating or reduced inference demand (unlikely) to see prices come back down.
Unless the demand shifts, the more likely scenario is that companies going out of business will be able to sell off their RAM at higher prices than they bought it at.
Oh lordy, after the bankruptcies there are going to be creditors fighting each other in court to be paid back in ram.
Good. If people had nuclear in their backyard, we’d be a “junkyard nightmare” and a “dirty bomb hellscape.”
Hello enemy of all life on earth, how are you today?
Chernobyl didn’t turn the world against nuclear powerplants forever so it’s probably fine.
In Germany it did.
Germany is not the world.
