6 ms·

I'm not too worried about displacement of jobs as I think that's actually somewhat overhyped as an outcome. The actual near term problems I see are: (a) perfec

by zmmmmm 4y ago

I'm not too worried about displacement of jobs as I think that's actually somewhat overhyped as an outcome. The actual near term problems I see are: (a) perfect emulation of human behaviour makes spam and fraud detection almost impossible. an LLM can now have an intelligent, reasoned conversation over weeks with a target to perfectly emulate an entity known to the target (their bank, loved one, etc etc). (b) direct attack on authenticity : we aren't far away from even video being faked in real time such that it's not even sufficient to get a person on a zoom call to understand that they are not real (c) entrenching of ultra subtle and complex biases into automated processes. I expect companies to rapidly deploy LLMs to automate aspects of information processing and the paradox is that the better it gets at not showing explicit biases the more insidious the residual will be. For example it's not going to automatically reject all black applicants for loans but it may well implement some much more subtle bias that is very hard to prove. (d) flooding of the internet with garbage. This might be the worst one in the end. I feel like fairly quickly we're going to see this evolve to requiring real identity for actual humans and ability to digitally sign content in ways bots can't replicate. That will then be the real problem outcome because the downstream effects of that will enable all kinds of censorship and control that we have thus far resisted / avoided on the internet.

shadowgovt 4y ago
(c) I always find interesting because worrying about it coming from AI implies that we don't think humans operate that way, or that it's somehow okay / acceptable / whatever that humans have subtle, hard-to-prove biases, but if those same biases show up in a machine (that we could, in theory, dissect and analyze to identify and prove those biases) it's worse.
- staticautomatic 4y ago
  I think the issue is more that we at least recognize humans are fallible. Less so with “algorithms”.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > I always find interesting because worrying about it coming from AI implies that we don't think humans operate that way, No, it says “entrenching” because we know humans operate that way, but AI systems are presented as objective and removing bias, despite the fact that they demonstrably reproduce bias, and because they replace systems of people where someone could push back with a single opaque automaton that will not, they solidify the biases they incorporate.
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    That's an education problem, because they're emphatically not objective; they're subjectivity analyzers. They're consistent in their application of bias but it's still bias.
- j16sdiz 4y ago
  When a human do that: you can ask for explanation, you can fire them. When a machine do that: you "tune" it, you make the bias less obvious, it face no consequence.
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    This seems somewhat isomorphic to me. How is firing a human different from tuning the AI away from its previous biases?
- hannasm 4y ago
  If a machine with one set of biases displaces thousands or millions of free thinking individuals with distinct biases then that bias proliferates.
- 6510 4y ago
  You are designing a promotional flyer, you have a white guy behind a desk on the front page. Its a big company, someone found the role to tell you there needs to be a black person in the image as well, and an asian, and a woman. You end up with 3 men and 3 woman one with each skin color and it looks completely ridiculous and set up so you randomize the set and end up with 3 white males. Suddenly you realize there is no way back from overthinking things.
- IshKebab 4y ago
  Worrying about (c) is kind of ridiculous given how car insurance and credit checks have worked for decades. Why do car insurance companies need to know my job again?
  - Arch-TK 4y ago
    At least in the UK it is perfectly legal to take your job title. Come up with some abstract concept of your job. Find every job title in the standardized list which falls within that abstract category and choose the one which makes your insurance premium the lowest. Its an annual exercise for me.
sillysaurusx 4y ago
In fairness, (d) is sort of already true. Google results are atrocious.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- SoftTalker 4y ago
  Yep, the garbage flood started a long time ago.
- lyu07282 4y ago
  It's a self fulfilling prophecy, llms flooding the internet with nonsense and then we need ever more advanced llms to distill the nonsense into something usable. So far the nonsense grew faster than search engines were able to adopt to it, but that might also just be because google stopped improving their search engine or their search is broken by Google's misaligned incentives.
- dietr1ch 4y ago
  garbage in, garbage out. The web became atrocious over time.
- numpad0 4y ago
  Yeah. 1/3rd of my Search results are like “is good Idea. <ProductName> limited time Offer” from <surname>-<localtown>-<industry>.com.<cctld>. Before that was “<search term> price in India”.
smeagull 4y ago
> I'm not too worried about displacement of jobs as I think that's actually somewhat overhyped as an outcome. I am. The people in charge of hiring and firing decisions are stupid, and frighten easily. As can be seen in the past year.
- 6510 4y ago
  Perhaps they are stupid enough to be replaced.
gonzo41 4y ago
A-D agree, But thinking about how they train llm's, what happens when LLM's start consuming a lot of their own content? Have you ever been alone for a really long time, without outside input you kind of go crazy. I suspect that a cancer like problem for AI will be how it handles not reinforcing on it's own data. I suspect bias, your C option will be the trickiest problem.
- pixl97 4y ago
  Ai is just becoming multimodal now, so while feeding it the output of stable diffusion may not be a good idea, there is still massive amounts of untapped data out there to train AI on and give it grounding.
mrshadowgoose 4y ago
We already have all the required cryptographic primitives (which you've already alluded to in d ) to completely address a), b) and d) if desired. Full enforcement however, would destroy the internet as we know it, and allow corps and governments to completely control our electronic lives. We already seem to be going down this path with the proliferation of remote attestation schemes in mobile devices, and increasingly in general computing as well.
- mdavidn 4y ago
  > We already have all the required cryptographic primitives (which you've already alluded to in d ) to completely address a), b) and d) if desired. Do we? My mother can barely keep the Russian DNS servers out of her home router. You want to entrust the public with individual cryptographic keys?
  - 6510 4y ago
    Imagine having an iq below X (which is an ever growing number) and being told: From now on the voice assistant makes all of your decisions. Then you carry the thing around and it talks with other voice assistants asking for advice with the conversation gradually growing into the familiar management designing things to make things as easy as possible for it self.
  - klodolph 4y ago
    You can use cryptography to solve problems without asking individual people to manage their own keys.
  - qualudeheart 4y ago
    What are security issues relating to Russian DNS servers?
incompatible 4y ago
The "catastrophe" scenario only seems likely if AIs are somehow claiming vast resources for themselves, such as all the world's electricity production. Otherwise, there's nothing to stop humans having the same level of production of goods and services that we have currently, and perhaps it could even be achieved with less effort if the AIs can be assigned some of the work.
red75prime 4y ago
(c) Ah, the insidious bias. No one knows how it works, but the results are easily predictable.
__MatrixMan__ 4y ago
Does this mean we will finally have key signing parties? I'm gonna make so many friends.
- klabb3 4y ago
  Yes. You bring your dongle and put it in everyone’s laptops. Others put their dongles in yours. On a more serious note, I think even the author of GPG said that it was too complicated to use. It’s unfortunate, because we need e2ee auth & encryption more now than any time before.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - mr_mitm 4y ago
    Phil Zimmermann, inventor of PGP, couldn't figure out how to make it work on his mac. https://www.vice.com/en/article/vvbw9a/even-the-inventor-of-pgp-doesnt-use-pgp https://www.vice.com/en/article/vvbw9a/even-the-inventor-of-...
    - __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
      Ever played wingspan? I have been, and I'm soaking up all of this information about birds that I never thought I'd know, and having fun too. I'd like to make a board game that teaches web-of-trust hygiene in the same way. Then there can be an app that feels like playing the game, but really it's just a wrapper around PGP.
  - __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
    Actually, it's a pen-and-paper kind of shindig: https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/126533/why-shouldnt-i-bring-a-computer-to-a-key-signing-party https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/126533/why-shou...
- brundolf 4y ago
  Jokes/nostalgia aside, you don't really even need fancy encryption mechanisms. All that's important is that you only use the internet to interact with trusted parties, vs treating it as a public square where you can ~generally tell whether someone is a real person. A domain name, an email address, a social media username, etc are all as trustworthy as they are right now as long as you've verified the person is real through some non-digital channel first (or someone you trust has) I think the public social internet will die (for anything other than entertainment), but the direct-communication internet will look largely the same as it does today
quijoteuniv 4y ago
It might be that humans might finally need to face the human problems.
woeirua 4y ago
The internet is already full of garbage. GPT like models will accelerate the process, but honestly this is for the best. There are historical precedents for this situation. When garbage permeates a medium of communication, there’s a flight to quality. We’re already seeing this with the reemergence of paywalls on top tier sites.
abhayhegde 4y ago
I'm worried about the displacement of jobs. Why would any company want to hire someone to pay 30$ per hour while you could ask a bot?
- IshKebab 4y ago
  They wouldn't, though despite ChatGPT's very impressive skills (I haven't tried GPT4 yet) it's still a very long way from actually being able to replace most skilled jobs.
  - abhayhegde 4y ago
    But do you agree that majority of the software jobs are replaceable in foreseeable future?
    - jmoak3 4y ago
      I agree that I can see it from here, but remember when nukes were invented people said “that’s it they’re going to make a bomb big enough to knock everything out in one go and anyone could make one, and that’ll be it” As far as I can tell it hasn’t happened yet, so keep an eye on things. I used to be disappointed by slow ai progress, now, not so much.
motoxpro 4y ago
Agree with all of your points. Side note, funny that (a) used to be how we would test for AGI (turing test) and now it's just "a problem with AI"
falcor84 4y ago
> For example it's not going to automatically reject all black applicants for loans but it may well implement some much more subtle bias that is very hard to prove. This sounds to me like a perfect explanation of the existing situation
throwaway173738 4y ago
The goofing off the internet with garbage has already begun if my search results are anything to go by. I have to go 3 pages deep before I get anything written by a human
valdiorn 4y ago
Regarding d) - the whole idea from Cyberpunk that there was an "old internet" that was taken over by rogue AIs who now control it, with NetSec keeping them at bay and preventing them from spilling over into the new internet, is getting increasingly likely. I can definitely see a possibility where the current internet as we know it just gets flooded with AI crap, and humans will have to build entirely new technologies to replace the old World Wide Web, with real-world identity checks to enable access to it, and so on. Oh, and probably some kind of punitive system for people who abuse their access (chinese social credit style)
- toss1 4y ago
  Combining that with b) above, and what we get is that no important decision will be made without an in-person meeting. So, rather than technology speeding up everything, we will slow down everything to pre-telephone days. Bob, the CFO, will tell Alice, the CEO, that sure, I can make that transfer of $173 million to [new_supplier_bank_acct], do you want me to fly to your office for us to complete the hardcopy authorization papers, or will you be coming to mine? All that stuff that was accelerated by telegraph, telephone, fax, mobile phones, email, video calls . . . poof! Pretty much entirely untrustworthy for anything significant. The only way around it could be a quantum-resistant and very trustworthy encryption system... I'm not sure the net result of this technology actually makes life better. Seems to empower the criminals more than the regular people. Deploy the technology against itself, train the cops to use it? My guess is that they'll always be several steps behind. Even if we try to do the right thing and kill it, it is already out of the bag - the authoritarian states like China and Russia will certainly attempt to deploy it to their advantage. The only way out now is to take maximum advantage of it.
  - Arch-TK 4y ago
    No. Encryption has nothing to do with the problem. Ignoring quantum resistance (which is still probably not needed for any of this) you just need something like PGP with a key stored on a CCID card (with all other copies of the key stored on an airgapped and secured machine or non existent). Theft of the card is equivalent to someone stealing an employee's equipment. Theft of the card pin is equivalent to someone phishing the pin from the employee. To that extent, post perfect-AI-imitation you have the same guarantees as you have today. But this IS a massive step back in convenience. And if the card is stolen, the employee can no longer call in to prove their ID to have the card revoked. Because in that case, attackers would just spam companies with legitimate looking revocation requests. But I guess what this COULD cause is a black market for stolen CCID cards and pins, and therefore crime to fuel the market.
stbede 4y ago
But what prevents a human from digitally signing content generated by an AI?
- biscottigelato 4y ago
  Exactly. A sufficiently intelligent AI can easily make a human do its bidding, through incentive, coercion, emotional manipulation. Easy peasy. Didn't GPT-4 already did that to a Task Rabbit worker?
ryandvm 4y ago
Theres another one similar to A but perpetrated by the Marketing Industrial Complex. What chance do you have when Facebook or Google decide to dedicate a GPT-4 level LLM to creating AI-generated posts, articles, endorsements, social media activity, and reviews targeted 100% AT YOU? They're going to feed it 15 years of your emails, chats, and browser activity and then tell it to brainwash the fuck out of you into buying the next Nissan. Humans are no match for this kind of hyper individualized marketing and it's coming RIGHT AT YOU.
- Arch-TK 4y ago
  All those years spent not having a Facebook account and hosting my own mail infrastructure have finally paid off.
- zmmmmm 4y ago
  Agree. someone I know involved in the field views LLMs precisely this way : they are a direct attack on human psychology, because their primary training criteria is to make up sets of words that humans believe sound plausible. Not truth, fact based and certainly not in our interests. Just, "what would a human be unable to reject as implausible". When you view it this way, they are almost like human brain viruses - a foreign element that is specifically designed to plug into our brains in an undetectable way and then influence us. And this virus is something that nothing in human evolution has prepared us for. Deployed at scale for any kind of influence operation (advertising or otherwise) it is kind of terrifying to think about.
  - maeil 4y ago
    > Deployed at scale for any kind of influence operation (advertising or otherwise) it is kind of terrifying to think about. Ironically this kind of influence operation may be the only realistic way to prevent earth from becoming uninhabitable for humans. This is what the likes of Extinction Rebellion should be spending their time on, not blocking roads.
- narrator 4y ago
  Wait till the end war comes and they need more cannon fodder.

by zmmmmm 4y ago

shadowgovt 4y ago

(c) I always find interesting because worrying about it coming from AI implies that we don't think humans operate that way, or that it's somehow okay / acceptable / whatever that humans have subtle, hard-to-prove biases, but if those same biases show up in a machine (that we could, in theory, dissect and analyze to identify and prove those biases) it's worse.

staticautomatic 4y ago
I think the issue is more that we at least recognize humans are fallible. Less so with “algorithms”.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> I always find interesting because worrying about it coming from AI implies that we don't think humans operate that way, No, it says “entrenching” because we know humans operate that way, but AI systems are presented as objective and removing bias, despite the fact that they demonstrably reproduce bias, and because they replace systems of people where someone could push back with a single opaque automaton that will not, they solidify the biases they incorporate.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  That's an education problem, because they're emphatically not objective; they're subjectivity analyzers. They're consistent in their application of bias but it's still bias.
j16sdiz 4y ago
When a human do that: you can ask for explanation, you can fire them. When a machine do that: you "tune" it, you make the bias less obvious, it face no consequence.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  This seems somewhat isomorphic to me. How is firing a human different from tuning the AI away from its previous biases?
hannasm 4y ago
If a machine with one set of biases displaces thousands or millions of free thinking individuals with distinct biases then that bias proliferates.
6510 4y ago
You are designing a promotional flyer, you have a white guy behind a desk on the front page. Its a big company, someone found the role to tell you there needs to be a black person in the image as well, and an asian, and a woman. You end up with 3 men and 3 woman one with each skin color and it looks completely ridiculous and set up so you randomize the set and end up with 3 white males. Suddenly you realize there is no way back from overthinking things.
IshKebab 4y ago
Worrying about (c) is kind of ridiculous given how car insurance and credit checks have worked for decades. Why do car insurance companies need to know my job again?
- Arch-TK 4y ago
  At least in the UK it is perfectly legal to take your job title. Come up with some abstract concept of your job. Find every job title in the standardized list which falls within that abstract category and choose the one which makes your insurance premium the lowest. Its an annual exercise for me.

sillysaurusx 4y ago

In fairness, (d) is sort of already true. Google results are atrocious.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
SoftTalker 4y ago
Yep, the garbage flood started a long time ago.
lyu07282 4y ago
It's a self fulfilling prophecy, llms flooding the internet with nonsense and then we need ever more advanced llms to distill the nonsense into something usable. So far the nonsense grew faster than search engines were able to adopt to it, but that might also just be because google stopped improving their search engine or their search is broken by Google's misaligned incentives.
dietr1ch 4y ago
garbage in, garbage out. The web became atrocious over time.
numpad0 4y ago
Yeah. 1/3rd of my Search results are like “is good Idea. <ProductName> limited time Offer” from <surname>-<localtown>-<industry>.com.<cctld>. Before that was “<search term> price in India”.

smeagull 4y ago

> I'm not too worried about displacement of jobs as I think that's actually somewhat overhyped as an outcome. I am. The people in charge of hiring and firing decisions are stupid, and frighten easily. As can be seen in the past year.

6510 4y ago
Perhaps they are stupid enough to be replaced.

gonzo41 4y ago

A-D agree, But thinking about how they train llm's, what happens when LLM's start consuming a lot of their own content? Have you ever been alone for a really long time, without outside input you kind of go crazy. I suspect that a cancer like problem for AI will be how it handles not reinforcing on it's own data. I suspect bias, your C option will be the trickiest problem.

pixl97 4y ago
Ai is just becoming multimodal now, so while feeding it the output of stable diffusion may not be a good idea, there is still massive amounts of untapped data out there to train AI on and give it grounding.

mrshadowgoose 4y ago

We already have all the required cryptographic primitives (which you've already alluded to in d ) to completely address a), b) and d) if desired. Full enforcement however, would destroy the internet as we know it, and allow corps and governments to completely control our electronic lives. We already seem to be going down this path with the proliferation of remote attestation schemes in mobile devices, and increasingly in general computing as well.

mdavidn 4y ago
> We already have all the required cryptographic primitives (which you've already alluded to in d ) to completely address a), b) and d) if desired. Do we? My mother can barely keep the Russian DNS servers out of her home router. You want to entrust the public with individual cryptographic keys?
- 6510 4y ago
  Imagine having an iq below X (which is an ever growing number) and being told: From now on the voice assistant makes all of your decisions. Then you carry the thing around and it talks with other voice assistants asking for advice with the conversation gradually growing into the familiar management designing things to make things as easy as possible for it self.
- klodolph 4y ago
  You can use cryptography to solve problems without asking individual people to manage their own keys.
- qualudeheart 4y ago
  What are security issues relating to Russian DNS servers?

incompatible 4y ago

The "catastrophe" scenario only seems likely if AIs are somehow claiming vast resources for themselves, such as all the world's electricity production. Otherwise, there's nothing to stop humans having the same level of production of goods and services that we have currently, and perhaps it could even be achieved with less effort if the AIs can be assigned some of the work.

red75prime 4y ago

__MatrixMan__ 4y ago

Does this mean we will finally have key signing parties? I'm gonna make so many friends.

klabb3 4y ago
Yes. You bring your dongle and put it in everyone’s laptops. Others put their dongles in yours. On a more serious note, I think even the author of GPG said that it was too complicated to use. It’s unfortunate, because we need e2ee auth & encryption more now than any time before.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mr_mitm 4y ago
  Phil Zimmermann, inventor of PGP, couldn't figure out how to make it work on his mac. https://www.vice.com/en/article/vvbw9a/even-the-inventor-of-pgp-doesnt-use-pgp https://www.vice.com/en/article/vvbw9a/even-the-inventor-of-...
  - __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
    Ever played wingspan? I have been, and I'm soaking up all of this information about birds that I never thought I'd know, and having fun too. I'd like to make a board game that teaches web-of-trust hygiene in the same way. Then there can be an app that feels like playing the game, but really it's just a wrapper around PGP.
- __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
  Actually, it's a pen-and-paper kind of shindig: https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/126533/why-shouldnt-i-bring-a-computer-to-a-key-signing-party https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/126533/why-shou...
brundolf 4y ago
Jokes/nostalgia aside, you don't really even need fancy encryption mechanisms. All that's important is that you only use the internet to interact with trusted parties, vs treating it as a public square where you can ~generally tell whether someone is a real person. A domain name, an email address, a social media username, etc are all as trustworthy as they are right now as long as you've verified the person is real through some non-digital channel first (or someone you trust has) I think the public social internet will die (for anything other than entertainment), but the direct-communication internet will look largely the same as it does today

quijoteuniv 4y ago

It might be that humans might finally need to face the human problems.

woeirua 4y ago

The internet is already full of garbage. GPT like models will accelerate the process, but honestly this is for the best. There are historical precedents for this situation. When garbage permeates a medium of communication, there’s a flight to quality. We’re already seeing this with the reemergence of paywalls on top tier sites.

abhayhegde 4y ago

I'm worried about the displacement of jobs. Why would any company want to hire someone to pay 30$ per hour while you could ask a bot?

IshKebab 4y ago
They wouldn't, though despite ChatGPT's very impressive skills (I haven't tried GPT4 yet) it's still a very long way from actually being able to replace most skilled jobs.
- abhayhegde 4y ago
  But do you agree that majority of the software jobs are replaceable in foreseeable future?
  - jmoak3 4y ago
    I agree that I can see it from here, but remember when nukes were invented people said “that’s it they’re going to make a bomb big enough to knock everything out in one go and anyone could make one, and that’ll be it” As far as I can tell it hasn’t happened yet, so keep an eye on things. I used to be disappointed by slow ai progress, now, not so much.

motoxpro 4y ago

Agree with all of your points. Side note, funny that (a) used to be how we would test for AGI (turing test) and now it's just "a problem with AI"

falcor84 4y ago

> For example it's not going to automatically reject all black applicants for loans but it may well implement some much more subtle bias that is very hard to prove. This sounds to me like a perfect explanation of the existing situation

throwaway173738 4y ago

The goofing off the internet with garbage has already begun if my search results are anything to go by. I have to go 3 pages deep before I get anything written by a human

valdiorn 4y ago

Regarding d) - the whole idea from Cyberpunk that there was an "old internet" that was taken over by rogue AIs who now control it, with NetSec keeping them at bay and preventing them from spilling over into the new internet, is getting increasingly likely. I can definitely see a possibility where the current internet as we know it just gets flooded with AI crap, and humans will have to build entirely new technologies to replace the old World Wide Web, with real-world identity checks to enable access to it, and so on. Oh, and probably some kind of punitive system for people who abuse their access (chinese social credit style)

toss1 4y ago
Combining that with b) above, and what we get is that no important decision will be made without an in-person meeting. So, rather than technology speeding up everything, we will slow down everything to pre-telephone days. Bob, the CFO, will tell Alice, the CEO, that sure, I can make that transfer of $173 million to [new_supplier_bank_acct], do you want me to fly to your office for us to complete the hardcopy authorization papers, or will you be coming to mine? All that stuff that was accelerated by telegraph, telephone, fax, mobile phones, email, video calls . . . poof! Pretty much entirely untrustworthy for anything significant. The only way around it could be a quantum-resistant and very trustworthy encryption system... I'm not sure the net result of this technology actually makes life better. Seems to empower the criminals more than the regular people. Deploy the technology against itself, train the cops to use it? My guess is that they'll always be several steps behind. Even if we try to do the right thing and kill it, it is already out of the bag - the authoritarian states like China and Russia will certainly attempt to deploy it to their advantage. The only way out now is to take maximum advantage of it.
- Arch-TK 4y ago
  No. Encryption has nothing to do with the problem. Ignoring quantum resistance (which is still probably not needed for any of this) you just need something like PGP with a key stored on a CCID card (with all other copies of the key stored on an airgapped and secured machine or non existent). Theft of the card is equivalent to someone stealing an employee's equipment. Theft of the card pin is equivalent to someone phishing the pin from the employee. To that extent, post perfect-AI-imitation you have the same guarantees as you have today. But this IS a massive step back in convenience. And if the card is stolen, the employee can no longer call in to prove their ID to have the card revoked. Because in that case, attackers would just spam companies with legitimate looking revocation requests. But I guess what this COULD cause is a black market for stolen CCID cards and pins, and therefore crime to fuel the market.

stbede 4y ago

But what prevents a human from digitally signing content generated by an AI?

biscottigelato 4y ago
Exactly. A sufficiently intelligent AI can easily make a human do its bidding, through incentive, coercion, emotional manipulation. Easy peasy. Didn't GPT-4 already did that to a Task Rabbit worker?

ryandvm 4y ago

Theres another one similar to A but perpetrated by the Marketing Industrial Complex. What chance do you have when Facebook or Google decide to dedicate a GPT-4 level LLM to creating AI-generated posts, articles, endorsements, social media activity, and reviews targeted 100% AT YOU? They're going to feed it 15 years of your emails, chats, and browser activity and then tell it to brainwash the fuck out of you into buying the next Nissan. Humans are no match for this kind of hyper individualized marketing and it's coming RIGHT AT YOU.

Arch-TK 4y ago
All those years spent not having a Facebook account and hosting my own mail infrastructure have finally paid off.
zmmmmm 4y ago
Agree. someone I know involved in the field views LLMs precisely this way : they are a direct attack on human psychology, because their primary training criteria is to make up sets of words that humans believe sound plausible. Not truth, fact based and certainly not in our interests. Just, "what would a human be unable to reject as implausible". When you view it this way, they are almost like human brain viruses - a foreign element that is specifically designed to plug into our brains in an undetectable way and then influence us. And this virus is something that nothing in human evolution has prepared us for. Deployed at scale for any kind of influence operation (advertising or otherwise) it is kind of terrifying to think about.
- maeil 4y ago
  > Deployed at scale for any kind of influence operation (advertising or otherwise) it is kind of terrifying to think about. Ironically this kind of influence operation may be the only realistic way to prevent earth from becoming uninhabitable for humans. This is what the likes of Extinction Rebellion should be spending their time on, not blocking roads.
narrator 4y ago
Wait till the end war comes and they need more cannon fodder.