haungack

I find it fascinating how oblivious people pretend to be about what our natural social hierarchies are, making fringe speculations ranging from proto-capitalism, over alpha male fantasies, to proto-communism.

Maybe it's too obvious, or too boring, but it's families. Incidentally, happens to be the same for actual, natural packs of wolves.

Same.

And what happens when a bubble bursts? Did the internet die when the dotcom bubble burst, or is that just when it really started to get going?

I share most of your sentiments against AI, but a bubble popping won't make it go away, and it won't even rectify it to be more to people's likings (i doubt it). It takes more than just waiting around to accomplish that.

Harm per presence is actually looking pretty darn good compared to cars, not to mention other humans. And if looking at certain nations and cultures where "strays" are historically not seen as such, but as communal protectors, where people are culturally aware of how to treat and coexist with them, they're often if not widely regarded as a major net-benefit.

why should we value their thoughts and opinions about how it’s used?

because they know shit

The Manhattan project scientists were writing hand wringing op-eds; making policy suggestions; and lobbing the government basically until they died. It didn’t amount to much.

touché

I'm not really asking for change, and to be totally honest, i'm just whining about something that i know i can't change.

edit: the deleted reply was identical, misclicks

The main challenge is the knowledge of software vulnerabilities. AI either has it or it doesn't. It will not be for some time, and i've given up trying to make precise estimates, before AI will be able to discover new software vulnerabilities in a way that is efficient (can run on IOT devices) and is easily obscured. Assuming current compute demands, one could try to come up with a rough estimate by extrapolating moore's law (which itself has become iffy).

BOINC-style distributed AI is another thing that people are working on, and one can at least imagine existing botnets maybe converting into distributed malicious AI platforms in foreseeable future?

Don't quote me on this.

You're being quite presumptuous and also directly contradicting some of what i wrote. Would you say "in 999999 out of 1000000 scenarios will surely harm us" sounds sci-fi utopia? Besides, the actual scifi fantasies that i did reference i stated as other people's inspirations (not mine), some of whom are much smarter and more accoplished than the entirety of lemmy combined, to say nothing of just you or me.

AI doesn’t have “its own sake.”

A literal rock has its own sake. You're thinly veiling vibes and outrage in pure rhetoric and a misleading semblance of rationality.

Unpopped kernels are my favorite

i went through much effort trying to come up with a way to not pop pocorn, so that i get maximal unpopped, but nicely toasted, kernels.

I don't know if the current AI phase is a bubble, but i agree with you that if it were a bubble and burst, it wouldn't somehow stop or end AI, but cause a new wave of innovation instead.

I've seen many AI opponents imply otherwise. When the dotcom bubble burst, the internet didn't exactly die.

Likewise, instruct the AI to break the word down into letters one per line first, and then they get it right more often. I think that's the point the post is trying to make.

The letter counting issue is actually a fundamental problem of whole-word or subword-tokenization that's had an obvious solution since ~2016, and i don't get why commercial AI won't implement a solution. Probably because it's a lot of training code complexity (but not much compute) for solving a very small problem.

fuck

didn't like the meme when it was a thing, but now i couldn't be happier to see it again