5 ms·

Ah just from how this is all written is obvious someone with a financial interest is trying to promote GPT-4.

HervalFreire 4y ago
I'm sure the person promoting electricity had financial interest in it. You know there is much nuance here yet you still had to make this simplistic comment. Put your real name and email address in your profile and respond with your full identity exposed. I want to see how history plays out. Then I can go back on these old threads to see who was actually wrong. Who were the idiots against the reality of global warming? The people who so fervently used every excuse to deny the reality of an impending catastrophe? There is no difference between those people and the people who consistently attempt to use every avenue available to attack the abilities of AI. These aren't rational people. They are people with an agenda that pushes them to modify their perception of reality around them to fit that agenda. That agenda is fear. Fear that a machine can surpass us and replace the software craft we have spent years honing. My advice to you is to open up your mind a bit. Heck I put my full identity and contact info in my profile. I stand by my views without hiding behind a throwaway account. If history proves me wrong the record is here for everyone to see.
- edc117 4y ago
  Some might fall into the category you've described, but I'd hazard a guess that a lot more are afraid of the rise of AI due to its owners. The cost to develop and operate these machines is high, and you can be sure whoever is using them to replace work done by people today will capture and hold every possible penny. People are afraid that AI will not serve the common good, and will instead serve a very rich few. Why? Because that's how it's always been with new advances, and more than ever how it is today. The vast gaps in wealth inequality will grow much larger with AI - it needs to be addressed first.
  - HervalFreire 4y ago
    Agreed. But why be delusional? The tool is right at your fingertips. Why deny the reality of the situation rather then face the truth? If they fear the AI owners attack the owners directly. Don't attack reality itself and say the AIs are just stochastic parrots and there's no risk to jobs at all.
- johnchristopher 4y ago
  I wonder what is the Amish's take on AI.
pessimizer 4y ago
You think this five paragraph article on Smithsonian Magazine's site is part of a conspiracy?
- chordalkeyboard 4y ago
  'conspiracy' is a loaded way to refer to http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
  - gcheong 4y ago
    This article doesn't read like a PR piece in the way PG describes at all though in that there is no discernible tie-in to AI or GPT as far as I can tell, so if the goal was to promote something other than the idea that people can sometimes be hard to convince of the value of new technologies that eventually become ubiquitous then I think it failed in that respect. I could see a similar article being written about the internet itself someday after everyone who lived through the initial skepticism about its economic and social benefits (still dubious) eventually passes on.

I'm sure the person promoting electricity had financial interest in it. You know there is much nuance here yet you still had to make this simplistic comment. Put your real name and email address in your profile and respond with your full identity exposed. I want to see how history plays out. Then I can go back on these old threads to see who was actually wrong. Who were the idiots against the reality of global warming? The people who so fervently used every excuse to deny the reality of an impending catastrophe? There is no difference between those people and the people who consistently attempt to use every avenue available to attack the abilities of AI. These aren't rational people. They are people with an agenda that pushes them to modify their perception of reality around them to fit that agenda. That agenda is fear. Fear that a machine can surpass us and replace the software craft we have spent years honing. My advice to you is to open up your mind a bit. Heck I put my full identity and contact info in my profile. I stand by my views without hiding behind a throwaway account. If history proves me wrong the record is here for everyone to see.

edc117 4y ago
Some might fall into the category you've described, but I'd hazard a guess that a lot more are afraid of the rise of AI due to its owners. The cost to develop and operate these machines is high, and you can be sure whoever is using them to replace work done by people today will capture and hold every possible penny. People are afraid that AI will not serve the common good, and will instead serve a very rich few. Why? Because that's how it's always been with new advances, and more than ever how it is today. The vast gaps in wealth inequality will grow much larger with AI - it needs to be addressed first.
- HervalFreire 4y ago
  Agreed. But why be delusional? The tool is right at your fingertips. Why deny the reality of the situation rather then face the truth? If they fear the AI owners attack the owners directly. Don't attack reality itself and say the AIs are just stochastic parrots and there's no risk to jobs at all.
johnchristopher 4y ago
I wonder what is the Amish's take on AI.

pessimizer 4y ago

You think this five paragraph article on Smithsonian Magazine's site is part of a conspiracy?

chordalkeyboard 4y ago
'conspiracy' is a loaded way to refer to http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- gcheong 4y ago
  This article doesn't read like a PR piece in the way PG describes at all though in that there is no discernible tie-in to AI or GPT as far as I can tell, so if the goal was to promote something other than the idea that people can sometimes be hard to convince of the value of new technologies that eventually become ubiquitous then I think it failed in that respect. I could see a similar article being written about the internet itself someday after everyone who lived through the initial skepticism about its economic and social benefits (still dubious) eventually passes on.