4 ms·

This doesn't seem to get much traction despite having been posted quite a few times the last days: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=AI%20machines%20aren%E2%80%99t%

This doesn't seem to get much traction despite having been posted quite a few times the last days: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=AI%20machines%20aren%E2%80%99t%20%E2%80%98hallucinating%E2%80%99.%20But%20their%20makers%20are&type=story&dateRange=all&sort=byDate&storyText=false&prefix&page=0 https://hn.algolia.com/?query=AI%20machines%20aren%E2%80%99t...

scheeseman486 3y ago
"There is a world in which generative AI, as a powerful predictive research tool and a performer of tedious tasks, could indeed be marshalled to benefit humanity, other species and our shared home. But for that to happen, these technologies would need to be deployed inside a vastly different economic and social order than our own, one that had as its purpose the meeting of human needs and the protection of the planetary systems that support all life." They say that yet heartily defend one of the biggest instruments of capitalism: copyright. The author comes close to hitting on the root cause, that it's our societal systems that leave those affected by automation disenfranchised and abandoned, with technology exposing and exacerbating the flaws that already exist in our social frameworks. Which is a problem of course, but one only solved by changing those systems. "We live under capitalism, and under that system, the effects of flooding the market with technologies that can plausibly perform the economic tasks of countless working people is not that those people are suddenly free to become philosophers and artists. It means that those people will find themselves staring into the abyss – with actual artists among the first to fall." The first? This has been happening since mechanization. The entire article is a tedious exercise in "so close yet so far".
richardjam73 3y ago
It is counter-cultural to the SV VC types on HN.

scheeseman486 3y ago

"There is a world in which generative AI, as a powerful predictive research tool and a performer of tedious tasks, could indeed be marshalled to benefit humanity, other species and our shared home. But for that to happen, these technologies would need to be deployed inside a vastly different economic and social order than our own, one that had as its purpose the meeting of human needs and the protection of the planetary systems that support all life." They say that yet heartily defend one of the biggest instruments of capitalism: copyright. The author comes close to hitting on the root cause, that it's our societal systems that leave those affected by automation disenfranchised and abandoned, with technology exposing and exacerbating the flaws that already exist in our social frameworks. Which is a problem of course, but one only solved by changing those systems. "We live under capitalism, and under that system, the effects of flooding the market with technologies that can plausibly perform the economic tasks of countless working people is not that those people are suddenly free to become philosophers and artists. It means that those people will find themselves staring into the abyss – with actual artists among the first to fall." The first? This has been happening since mechanization. The entire article is a tedious exercise in "so close yet so far".

richardjam73 3y ago

It is counter-cultural to the SV VC types on HN.