3 ms·
> But what it's being interpreted as is more like "be excessively prudish and politically correct at all times" -- which I doubt was ever really anyone's main c
by darkwater 3y ago
> But what it's being interpreted as is more like "be excessively prudish and politically correct at all times" -- which I doubt was ever really anyone's main concern with AGI.
Fast forward 5-10 years, someone will say: "LLM were the worst thing we developed because they made us more stupid and permitted politicians to control even more the public opinion in a subtle way.
Just like tech/HN bubble started saying a few years ago about social networks (which were praised as revolutionary 15 years ago).
- didntcheck 3y agoAnd it's amazing how many people you can get to cheer it on if you brand it as "combating dangerous misinformation". It seems people never learn the lesson that putting faith in one group of people to decree what's "truth" or "ethical" is almost always a bad idea, even when (you think) it's your "side"
- mlrtime 3y agoCan this be compared to "Think of the children" responses to other technologoy advances that certain groups want to slow down or prohibit?
- fallingknife 3y agoWhy would anyone say that? The last 30 years of tech have given them less and less control. Why would LLMs be any different?
- dnissley 3y agoAbsolutely, assuming LLMs are still around in a similar form by that time. I disagree on the particulars. Will it be for the reason that you mention? I really am not sure -- I do feel confident though that the argument will be just as ideological and incoherent as the ones people make about social media today.
- unethical_ban 3y agoI'm already saying that. The toothpaste is out of the tube, but this tech will radically change the world.
- Cacti 3y agoYour average HNer is only here because of the money. Willful blindness and ignorance is incredibly common.