6 ms·

I imagined a world full of robots with personality as well. I never imagined that that personality would be working for it's real owner (Amazon, Google et al)

I imagined a world full of robots with personality as well. I never imagined that that personality would be working for it's real owner (Amazon, Google et al) and trying to control me. Until it's MY friend, I am not interested in lending some of my soul to it. We're not on the correct path are we?

yetihehe 3y ago
In the end he suggsted that further development of AI models will help with such projects. I think there will be a lot of opensource personal AI's available in several years when reasonably cheap accelerator chips become available enough.
ilaksh 3y ago
Some of the leading open source LLMs can perform about as well for what he demonstrated. It's not like it was writing code or something.
elicash 3y ago
My experience hasn't been that my Alexa or that Siri tries to control me. I use it to set timers and play music and that's about it. On the generative AI front, OpenAI/Microsoft doesn't control me either. I use it as a coding assistant instead of searching StackOverflow, or when I want to brainstorm lists of other ways of writing the same thing when I don't like what I've written and am not sure the best way to improve it. Could just be you're approaching the tools wrong? But I can't imagine what you're doing where they're controlling you.
- svnt 3y ago
  Prompt: Tell me you’ve never read Brave New World without telling me you’ve never read Brave New World.
  - elicash 3y ago
    None of this is anything like Brave New World.
    - svnt 3y ago
      The best controlled population (arguably the only controlled population) is the one that doesn’t realize it is being controlled.
      - elicash 3y ago
        Wow the very fact that someone disagrees with you must mean that you're right! You realize how insane and circular that is, right?
        svnt 3y ago
        I’m not seeing what me being downvoted has to do with anything. My response is exactly what Aldous Huxley was saying. The viewpoint has the potential to trend toward the insane if it is the unconsidered default, for sure. You can’t go around thinking everything that happens to you is a grand conspiracy. In your situation, though, you are informing systems (that are larger than human ability to productively think about) on how to perform your job. You do this because those systems allow you a local competitive advantage — you get more done for less work. But your only real hope is that it takes them longer to replace you than it takes you to escape.
        elicash 3y ago
        I have no idea why you were downvoted (wasn't me) and wasn't referencing it. I was referring to the circular logic of your reply to me where you imply that the very fact that I don't realize I'm being controlled is evidence I am controlled. And the reason I use Alexa to set a timer is because my hands are occupied in the kitchen. You're overthinking it. Nothing to do with giving up control.
        svnt 3y ago
- feoren 3y ago
  You may be using a stricter definition of "control you" than GP was. Perhaps the better word would be "influencing" you. That can mean something as subtle as reminding you that pizza exists and it's yummy and mmm isn't pizza just so yummy? Basically what commercials have been trying to do since forever. Even if you don't believe Alexa and Siri are recording everything you say, I think it's pretty clear that asking them to play music gives them some power to influence you. You're telling them your musical tastes, and you're (presumably) letting them pick some songs for you. (At the very least, by simply not having the song you asked for available.) One reason, perhaps even the biggest reason, that Amazon and Apple created those products is to sell you more shit, and both of these give them some power to influence your buying habits. Perhaps that power is tiny, and the tradeoff is worth it. They're also trying to influence who you buy from, or what services you subscribe to. Vendor lock-in and all that. Is that not them trying to influence you? Perhaps even to control you?
  - elicash 3y ago
    If you agree with me what they said about "control" and "lending my soul" is wrong, why pretend otherwise? If all they intended to say was that they don't like that if someone asks Alexa to play a playlist, that Amazon can choose which songs are on that playlist assuming its one Amazon put together, then they would have said that. Instead they said a different thing. No, that's not an example of control. It's a feature I paid for!
kortex 3y ago
I actually think we are mostly on the right path, with the greatest exception being the current cost and overhead required to train the very best language models. But we are already seeing smaller, fine-tunable, user-deployable models. I think (and hope) it'll track a similar trajectory to 3d printing: 1. Expensive systems only approachable to large corporations 2. Lower-cost but affordable as a business expense to cottage industry 3. Affordable to hobbyists, but requiring domain expertise to operate 4. COTS plug and play solutions for the wide audience Right now we are at (1) with the huge scale LLMs, but scaled models are runnable by hobbyists (2-3) and we are at (4) when it comes to things like image generation and music splitting.
ganzuul 3y ago
We're on the correct timeline. It's just that people are extremely reluctant to embrace technologies which make part of the ego redundant. For example, an AI slave (lit. robot) is useless to you because then you have the master-slave mentality so half of you is still a slave. Once we're actually OK inside we won't even think we need technology.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

yetihehe 3y ago

In the end he suggsted that further development of AI models will help with such projects. I think there will be a lot of opensource personal AI's available in several years when reasonably cheap accelerator chips become available enough.

ilaksh 3y ago

Some of the leading open source LLMs can perform about as well for what he demonstrated. It's not like it was writing code or something.

elicash 3y ago

My experience hasn't been that my Alexa or that Siri tries to control me. I use it to set timers and play music and that's about it. On the generative AI front, OpenAI/Microsoft doesn't control me either. I use it as a coding assistant instead of searching StackOverflow, or when I want to brainstorm lists of other ways of writing the same thing when I don't like what I've written and am not sure the best way to improve it. Could just be you're approaching the tools wrong? But I can't imagine what you're doing where they're controlling you.

svnt 3y ago
Prompt: Tell me you’ve never read Brave New World without telling me you’ve never read Brave New World.
- elicash 3y ago
  None of this is anything like Brave New World.
  - svnt 3y ago
    The best controlled population (arguably the only controlled population) is the one that doesn’t realize it is being controlled.
    - elicash 3y ago
      Wow the very fact that someone disagrees with you must mean that you're right! You realize how insane and circular that is, right?
      - svnt 3y ago
        I’m not seeing what me being downvoted has to do with anything. My response is exactly what Aldous Huxley was saying. The viewpoint has the potential to trend toward the insane if it is the unconsidered default, for sure. You can’t go around thinking everything that happens to you is a grand conspiracy. In your situation, though, you are informing systems (that are larger than human ability to productively think about) on how to perform your job. You do this because those systems allow you a local competitive advantage — you get more done for less work. But your only real hope is that it takes them longer to replace you than it takes you to escape.
        elicash 3y ago
        I have no idea why you were downvoted (wasn't me) and wasn't referencing it. I was referring to the circular logic of your reply to me where you imply that the very fact that I don't realize I'm being controlled is evidence I am controlled. And the reason I use Alexa to set a timer is because my hands are occupied in the kitchen. You're overthinking it. Nothing to do with giving up control.
        svnt 3y ago
feoren 3y ago
You may be using a stricter definition of "control you" than GP was. Perhaps the better word would be "influencing" you. That can mean something as subtle as reminding you that pizza exists and it's yummy and mmm isn't pizza just so yummy? Basically what commercials have been trying to do since forever. Even if you don't believe Alexa and Siri are recording everything you say, I think it's pretty clear that asking them to play music gives them some power to influence you. You're telling them your musical tastes, and you're (presumably) letting them pick some songs for you. (At the very least, by simply not having the song you asked for available.) One reason, perhaps even the biggest reason, that Amazon and Apple created those products is to sell you more shit, and both of these give them some power to influence your buying habits. Perhaps that power is tiny, and the tradeoff is worth it. They're also trying to influence who you buy from, or what services you subscribe to. Vendor lock-in and all that. Is that not them trying to influence you? Perhaps even to control you?
- elicash 3y ago
  If you agree with me what they said about "control" and "lending my soul" is wrong, why pretend otherwise? If all they intended to say was that they don't like that if someone asks Alexa to play a playlist, that Amazon can choose which songs are on that playlist assuming its one Amazon put together, then they would have said that. Instead they said a different thing. No, that's not an example of control. It's a feature I paid for!

kortex 3y ago

I actually think we are mostly on the right path, with the greatest exception being the current cost and overhead required to train the very best language models. But we are already seeing smaller, fine-tunable, user-deployable models. I think (and hope) it'll track a similar trajectory to 3d printing: 1. Expensive systems only approachable to large corporations 2. Lower-cost but affordable as a business expense to cottage industry 3. Affordable to hobbyists, but requiring domain expertise to operate 4. COTS plug and play solutions for the wide audience Right now we are at (1) with the huge scale LLMs, but scaled models are runnable by hobbyists (2-3) and we are at (4) when it comes to things like image generation and music splitting.

ganzuul 3y ago

We're on the correct timeline. It's just that people are extremely reluctant to embrace technologies which make part of the ego redundant. For example, an AI slave (lit. robot) is useless to you because then you have the master-slave mentality so half of you is still a slave. Once we're actually OK inside we won't even think we need technology.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]