3 ms·
There seem to be a lot of people in this thread who consider themselves to be calculators. I too have to restrain myself from writing massive rants.
by jprete 4y ago
There seem to be a lot of people in this thread who consider themselves to be calculators. I too have to restrain myself from writing massive rants.
- CatWChainsaw 4y agoPeople espousing this opinion seem to have grown quite a lot since ChatGPT first became public. Cynical as I am, I do suspect some astroturfing trying to prepare people for being "obsolete".
- jprete 4y agoI also suspect astroturfing, particularly here, and I also notice it on Substack (I don't visit a whole lot of other sites anymore). On Substack I see two clusters, one group _very into_ AI, the other advocating a lot of caution. I don't think it's preparing people to be obsolete; I think it's a combination of AI startup founders hyping up their tech, and people who identify with big tech/"the side that wants AI".
- CatWChainsaw 4y agoHype no doubt plays a part, which is a perfect cover for any truly malicious astroturfing. But when I say "prepare to be obsolete", I mean prepare to be obsoleteD.
- ChatGTP 4y agoWhat’s the difference ?
- CatWChainsaw 4y agoRight now, billionaires who profess the view that AI could end humanity are working their hardest to progress the field as fast as possible, scoffing at "ethics", "safety", and "responsibility". So if they do get their god-machine, they're not going to look around at 8 billion fellow humans (biological stochastic parrots, according to some) who are suddenly "obsolete", but using up resources, and think "fully automated space luxury communism".
- ChatGTP 4y agoGot it. Definitely feels like some type of play for dominance.
- CatWChainsaw 4y agoWhich leads to the questions, dominance for whom, and over whom. And why, if we're supposedly entering an age of post-scarcity where AI can enable anyone to do anything, we would need dominance in the first place.