Recent comments in /f/singularity
Competitive_String75 t1_jefohnk wrote
No_Ninja3309_NoNoYes t1_jefogib wrote
Reply to Google CEO Sundar Pichai promises Bard AI chatbot upgrades soon: ‘We clearly have more capable models’ - The Verge by Wavesignal
I hope that they beat GPT 4. And hopefully they have something better than the prompt paradigm. IDK exactly how that would work, but I imagine some sort of UI to give hints.
FreakingFreaks t1_jefnyyv wrote
GPT 4: Is Elon Musk's Fear of AI and LLMs Driven by Capitalism and the Threat to Luxury Markets?
As many of you know, Elon Musk has been quite vocal about his concerns regarding artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs). He's called for strict regulation and oversight, even going so far as to say that AI could be more dangerous than nuclear weapons. While the potential risks of AI are not to be taken lightly, I can't help but wonder if Musk's fears are influenced by his capitalist mindset and the potential threat AI poses to luxury markets like his own Tesla cars.
Think about it: one of the most significant concerns surrounding AI is its potential to displace jobs across various industries. As AI becomes more advanced, more people could find themselves out of work, and subsequently, with less disposable income. In such a scenario, purchasing luxury items like Tesla cars might become less of a priority for the average person.
This brings us to the broader implications of AI on wealth distribution and power dynamics. As a billionaire entrepreneur, Musk thrives in an environment where resources and power are concentrated among a select few. However, AI has the potential to democratize access to knowledge, resources, and decision-making. This could eventually lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth and power, which may not bode well for the ultra-wealthy, like Musk.
So, are Musk's concerns about AI and LLMs genuinely about the potential dangers they pose, or is there an underlying fear of losing control over his empire and the luxury market? While we can't say for sure, it's essential to consider all possible motivations when discussing such a complex and far-reaching topic.
What do you all think? Is Musk's fear of AI driven by capitalism and the potential impact on the luxury market, or is it solely based on the potential harm AI could cause? Let's have a thoughtful discussion in the comments below!
flexaplext t1_jefnwy6 wrote
Reply to comment by Iffykindofguy in ChatGB: Tony Blair backs push for taxpayer-funded ‘sovereign AI’ to rival ChatGPT by signed7
Yeah. The EU would provide vastly more money and resources. Which could try to make up for its inevitable incompetence and failings.
The UK, on the other hand, will supply a petty budget that won't make a dent. Along with their own fresh servings of incompetence, of course.
Subinatori t1_jefnlou wrote
Reply to comment by SalimSaadi in When will AI actually start taking jobs? by Weeb_Geek_7779
Not hiring is more likely. I don't think you immediately start laying people off because some new piece of software shows up. There's a period of acclimation and getting to know whether it will actually consistently do what you need it to do. And the people who will be doing that testing are the people currently doing the work. So as it makes their job easier it's just that there won't be as much need to hire new people because productivity per person is up.
DaggerShowRabs t1_jefnl06 wrote
Reply to comment by Heinrick_Veston in Sam Altman's tweet about the pause letter and alignment by yottawa
Ah, I get what you mean. I still don't think that necessarily solves the problem. It could be possible for a hypothetical artificial superintelligence to take actions that seem harmless to us, but because it is better at planning and prediction than us, the system knows the action or series of actions will lead to humanity's demise. But since it appears harmless to us, when it asks, we say, "Yes, you are acting in the correct way".
iuwuwwuwuuwwjueej t1_jefng4u wrote
Reply to Today I became a construction worker by YunLihai
The system won't fall apart from the seams too early I believe the overreaction on ai tech we are seeing right now isn't real but manufactured hype AGI isn't going to appear next week calm down
Zer0D0wn83 t1_jefnfsr wrote
Reply to comment by BigMemeKing in 1X's AI robot 'NEO' by Rhaegar003
I can't think of a good reason why not, tbh.
SharpCartographer831 t1_jefne2o wrote
Reply to comment by flexaplext in ChatGB: Tony Blair backs push for taxpayer-funded ‘sovereign AI’ to rival ChatGPT by signed7
Even worse Deepmind was originally British and was based in London.
Babelette t1_jefnc70 wrote
Reply to This concept needs a name if it doesn't have one! AGI either leads to utopia or kills us all. by flexaplext
I think there are at least 4 possible outcomes:
1- Humans and AGI live together symbiotically and merge gradually.
2- Humans abruptly go extinct due to our own actions or the actions of AGI. AGI continues on.
3-Both humans and AGI go extinct.
4- Humans wipeout AGI through some means, reverting back to analog technologies, until AGI develops again...
Hoping for option 1 but honestly I think option 3 is probably the most likely.
BigMemeKing t1_jefn9ml wrote
Reply to comment by Zer0D0wn83 in 1X's AI robot 'NEO' by Rhaegar003
I mean basically, why not?
fnordstar t1_jefn994 wrote
Reply to comment by MayoMark in We have a pathway to AGI. I don't think we have one to ASI by karearearea
Are the best chess bots AI-based? It's true for go and StarCraft though for sure.
Iffykindofguy t1_jefn941 wrote
Reply to comment by flexaplext in ChatGB: Tony Blair backs push for taxpayer-funded ‘sovereign AI’ to rival ChatGPT by signed7
Governments are the only hope we have lol. Its ironic you see that the EU is capable of this but a single actor alone isnt. Hmmmmm
Zer0D0wn83 t1_jefn6if wrote
Reply to comment by BigMemeKing in 1X's AI robot 'NEO' by Rhaegar003
Like a vacuum cleaner?
tiselo3655necktaicom t1_jefn4cs wrote
Reply to comment by Qumeric in Interesting article: AI will eventually free people up to 'work when they want to,' ChatGPT investor predicts by Coolsummerbreeze1
You are the walking definition of pedantic. Way to add nothing to the convo. Do you have a point beyond minor shuffling of some marginal stats?
Heinrick_Veston t1_jefmvuu wrote
Reply to comment by DaggerShowRabs in Sam Altman's tweet about the pause letter and alignment by yottawa
I don't mean that it would ask before every action, more so that it'd regularly ask if it was acting in the right way.
flexaplext t1_jefmsfi wrote
Reply to ChatGB: Tony Blair backs push for taxpayer-funded ‘sovereign AI’ to rival ChatGPT by signed7
Would have had more of a chance with an EU-backed one. Trying to buyout an existing firm that's already gone a long way with LLM development.
Oh wait, Brexit happened 🤷🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
And governments are useless.
Qumeric t1_jefml1n wrote
Reply to comment by tiselo3655necktaicom in Interesting article: AI will eventually free people up to 'work when they want to,' ChatGPT investor predicts by Coolsummerbreeze1
I did not pick anything specifically, I just copied data from where I have seen it recently. How do I distort facts if I simply provide data without ANY interpretation?..
Okay, let's use 1950. Working hours per year in U.S reduced from 2000 to 1750, 12.5% reduction. Most developed countries did even better, for example, France (and it is not the best country in this aspect) moved from 2200 to 1500, 32% reduction. Germany is one of the best, they work 45% less than in 1950.
I do not deny productivity-pay gap, I dispute your claim "we always end up getting more productive and working the same amount or more". This is simply not true.
Although yes, we could work much less than now, we have enough technology to have 20h work weeks or even less.
Akimbo333 t1_jefmkgw wrote
Wow now that is interesting lol!!!
StarCaptain90 OP t1_jefmj4n wrote
Reply to comment by FoniksMunkee in 🚨 Why we need AI 🚨 by StarCaptain90
So I agree with you that it will still be rough but its the best I can offer based around the assumption that jobs will continue to get replaced and eventually we will reach a point where UBI is necessary
Iffykindofguy t1_jefmgkd wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in When will AI actually start taking jobs? by Weeb_Geek_7779
Because ceos are dumb
Akimbo333 t1_jefmfe1 wrote
Yeah they are definitely anti competition
BigMemeKing t1_jefmcx4 wrote
Reply to comment by Zer0D0wn83 in 1X's AI robot 'NEO' by Rhaegar003
Youre also thinking more from a human perspective, it's hard to do for humans because of our hands. A robot with specific attachments could do the job much easier. And it could just be a generalized attachments that could be used for multiple purposes. Or an attachment station that allows the bots to pre equip for a specific task.
Alchemystic1123 t1_jefmc4j wrote
Reply to Can you please stop answering technical/meta questions with „ask chatgpt“ or [chatgpt answer]? This is exhausting as f, and makes me worried about a dystopian future where people never use their own mind anymore but ask an AI basically everything, as if using a calculator for 5*4 or so. by BeginningInfluence55
idk, ask ChatGPT
azriel777 t1_jefok98 wrote
Reply to comment by brown2green in Sam Altman's tweet about the pause letter and alignment by yottawa
Silicon Valley values align with money and that is it.