FaceDeer

Thanks for showing that you have no actual arguments.

You did it first by jumping to "think of the children!" And analogizing running a program to cannibalism.

They have no real benefit.

No need to ban them, then. Nobody will use them if this is true.

They have insane energy requirements, insane hardware requirements.

I run them locally on my computer, I know this is factually incorrect through direct experience.

Personal experience aside, if running an LLM query really required "insane" energy and hardware expenditures then why are companies like Google so eager to do it for free? These are public companies whose mandates are to generate a profit. Whatever they're getting out of running those LLM queries must be worth the cost of running them.

We are working on saving our planet

I see you've switched from "think of the children!" To "think of the environment!"

Depends which 90%.

It's ironic that this thread is on the Fediverse, which I'm sure has much less than 10% the population of Reddit or Facebook or such. Is the Fediverse "dead"?

This is one of the biggest problems with AI. If it becomes the easiest way to get good answers for most things

If it's the easiest way to get good answers for most things, that doesn't seem like a problem to me. If it isn't the easiest way to get good answers, then why are people switching to it en mass anyway in this scenario?

This is mostly just a matter of proper prompting.

People will use whatever method of finding answers that works best for them.

Stuck, you contact tech support, wait weeks for a reply, and the cycle continues

Why didn't you post a question on a public forum in that scenario? Or, in the future, why wouldn't the AI search agent itself post a question? If questions need to be asked then there's nothing stopping them from still being asked.

LLMs are awesome in their knowledge until you start to hear its answers to stuff you already know and makes you wonder if anything was correct.

This applies equally well to human-generated answers to stuff.

Silly me, I forgot that running an LLM model was so similar to cannibalism.

If they had that sort of lobbying power I doubt we'd see UBI to begin with. Regardless, "evil people might thwart it!" Is not a very good reason not to try to do good things.

You may know IPv6 is ridiculously bigger, but you don't know it.

There are enough IPv6 addresses that you could give 10^17 addresses to every square millimeter of Earth's surface. Or 5×10^28 addresses for every living human being. On a more cosmic scale, you could issue 4×10^15 addresses to every star in the observable universe.

We're not going to run out by giving them to lightbulbs.

Ironically, I think that the positive impact of UBI is probably well enhanced by various free-market processes. There's the cost of living balance you mention, but it also makes it easier for market forces to affect wages. When people don't literally have to work simply to survive, it gives them the option to say "no, this job sucks, I'm walking away from it" much more easily. That means that employers will need to be more attentive to their employees' needs if they want to keep them.

Trek fans being Trek fans, there's a page where every appearance of that book is matched to the page that was open in the particular episode it was seen in.

By "shield itself" that includes securing its power grid. It's not hard, it just takes a little foresight. Hence why humans are bad at it.

And also the "EMP as technology kryptonite" trope.

If an AI is clever enough to enslave humanity it's clever enough to understand farraday cages.