blaine

Fair enough, but the short term track we're on is still a hellish dystopia. For the societal damage I'm worried about to happen, we don't really need AGI as you are probably defining it. If we use the OpenAI definition for AGI, "systems that surpass human capabilities in a majority of economically valuable tasks", I'd argue that the technology we have today is practically there already. The only thing holding back the dystopia is that corporate America hasn't fully adapted to the new paradigm.

• Imagine a future where most fast food jobs have been replaced by AI-powered kiosks and drive-thrus.

• Imagine a future where most customer service jobs have been replaced by AI-powered video chat kiosks.

• Imagine a future where most artistic commission work is completed by algorithms.

• Imagine a future where all the news and advertising you read or watch is generated specifically to appeal to you by algorithms.

In this future, are the benefits of this technology shared equitably so that the people who used to do these jobs can enjoy their newfound leisure time? Or will those folks live in poverty while the majority of their incomes are siphoned off to the small fraction of the populace which are MS investors?

I think we all know the answer to that one.

Did you read the article? X is alleging that media matters had to manipulate their platform in order for it to generate these ads next to the hateful accounts. According to their records, those ads only appeared one time, for the user account associated with Media Matters. This supports their theory that manipulation was required.

I guess we'll have to wait for the court case to find out who's right. But immediately assuming the X lawsuit has no merits just because you don't like Elon Musk is a bit disingenuous.

I believe one of the worst possible timelines for the average human is one where for-profit capitalist entities control access to AGI and horde all the benefits accrued from it. OpenAI was founded specifically to avoid this - with a complicated governance structure designed to ensure true AGI would end up owned by humanity with the benefits shared by all.

The OpenAI board and top researchers made a desperate bid to prioritize safety over profits, and even with that elaborate governance structure behind them capitalism still seems to have found a way to fuck us.

Today we saw Satya Nadella and Sam Altman steer humanity further from a possible utopia and closer to.... Cyberpunk 2077.

Good luck everyone!

Good for MS, bad for humanity. I believe one of the worst possible timelines for the average human is one where for-profit capitalist entities control access to AGI and horde all the benefits accrued from it. OpenAI was founded specifically to avoid this - with a complicated governance structure designed to ensure true AGI would end up owned by humanity with the benefits shared by all.

The OpenAI board and top researchers made a desperate bid to prioritize safety over profits, and even with that elaborate governance structure behind them capitalism still seems to have found a way to fuck us.

Today we saw Satya Nadella and Sam Altman steer humanity further from a possible utopia and closer to.... Cyberpunk 2077.

Good luck everyone!

Thereby proving everything the board feared about him. Good riddance.

Here's what I don't understand. They went through the Singularity to the future because that was the only place the Control AI wouldn't be able to find them, right? Except Control was already destroyed before they went through the Singularity!

I've never even been able to start season 3 because I just can't get past the stupidity of not reversing the engines away from the Singularity the moment Control was eliminated as a threat.

Never forget that Sisko slept with Dax in the Mirror Universe.

The IDF spokesman in the clip confirmed they were aware of refugee women and children in the location before deciding to go ahead with the bombing.

I don't think "not optional" means what they think it means.

I guarantee you that if we do nothing at all, it will deorbit on its own thanks to friction from air molecules it passes through in orbit. Humans only occupy 14.5% of the surface of the planet, so even in an uncontrolled deorbit it seems like the odds would be against any property damage or loss of life.

An uncontrolled deorbit might be reckless. It might not be recommended. But it's definitely an option.