3 ms·

This is an important comment. Instead of "AI"(be real, llms and stable diffusion) being developed openly and studied without a profit motive, it's been thrust

This is an important comment. Instead of "AI"(be real, llms and stable diffusion) being developed openly and studied without a profit motive, it's been thrust into the cheap world of VCs looking to extract any profit whatsoever from it, nearly immediately. This has caused these "AI" tools to be used to steal and rehash artists work(cheapening artists because tech bros and MBAs resent art and the time it takes to perfect). Cheapening human labor(why pay a person to understand anything when you can have an llm do 20% of the job and worse). These AI tools were thrown in the deep end with a singular purpose: Cheapen what was thought to be protected from computers, while not providing any real value to the layperson. The average person can maybe get a funny joke, a bad few lines of code, or an ugly bespoke AI image for their medium article, but the true winners are the ones cutting jobs en masse before the tech has even matured, so both the employee and the customer gets a worse product while the MBA's show a solid quarterly report after they ran a knife across their workforce's neck. Those with power and money have continued to show they will not use technology for any positive societal purpose until they are forced to with regulation. So we're forced to neuter the technology before it can really develop. It's like one child playing violently with a toy, forcing the teacher to take the toy away from everyone else.

stateofinquiry 3y ago
There should be no surprise that "those with power and money" will not willingly apply "technology" for social good. It should be expected, rather. Your comment brings to mind Edward R. Murrow's speech in 1958 about the direction of television (certainly would be "high tech" back then!) He and others envisioned education, information, and enlightenment from this technology. Well, you know what we got instead. Here is a summary of the speech, and you can hear the whole thing on youtube if you like- still absolutely relevant. https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2014/today-in-media-history-edward-r-murrow-challenged-the-broadcast-industry-in-his-1958-rtnda-speech/ https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2014/today-in-medi... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIhy0T7Q48Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIhy0T7Q48Y We can see the same thing with other newer media; Ex. video games. I don't have solutions per se, though I wish this pattern could be different. The profit motive and appealing to base instinct seems to always "win".
- MSFT_Edging 3y ago
  I'm aware it should be expected. The target of my comment is specifically the "well profit=good" crowd on here. It's to point out the innate contradiction in how we speak about technology compared to the guaranteed outcome in our system. We're doomed as a species if we keep believing in the magical market as a primary mover for said species. We'll stall in a circlejerk of ads and stock buybacks and never accomplish anything, because any good use for technology is locked behind a gate due to the lack of profit. Any improvement in medicine is behind lock and key because the pharmaceutical companies "need to make back their investment" despite massive gov funding. We're killing ourselves here with the spectacle that this system is either working or worth saving.
  - stateofinquiry 3y ago
    True points, and I apologize for missing you actual point and wandering off a bit. We probably need another social model for technological development specifically- but I am not sure what it might be. If there is anything useful to salvage from my previous its that this issue has been with us for a long while.
    - MSFT_Edging 3y ago
      I think amazing gains could be made if we ripped the bandaid off and took all the weapons manufacturers and other gov contractors and used that brain power entirely for darpa style public works projects. Our current military industrial project is just a self fulfilling fantasy. Stop the contracts for war, create contracts and research for moving humanity forward without the need to strap it to a missile 20 years before it hits shelves. Keep IP rights publicly owned, license them to anyone and use the licensing fees to fund new research.
Aloisius 3y ago
One could make a similar argument about every other major technological advance in history. I’m not sure why people seem to believe AI is different or special or what leads them to believe you can stop it anymore than the automated loom or the combine harvester.
- MSFT_Edging 3y ago
  Given the invention of the cotton gin, the slave owners should have been clubbed to death and the technology not used to make slavery more enticing but to improve productivity to reduce level of effort and provide more free time. This can be translated to modern day.

stateofinquiry 3y ago

There should be no surprise that "those with power and money" will not willingly apply "technology" for social good. It should be expected, rather. Your comment brings to mind Edward R. Murrow's speech in 1958 about the direction of television (certainly would be "high tech" back then!) He and others envisioned education, information, and enlightenment from this technology. Well, you know what we got instead. Here is a summary of the speech, and you can hear the whole thing on youtube if you like- still absolutely relevant. https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2014/today-in-media-history-edward-r-murrow-challenged-the-broadcast-industry-in-his-1958-rtnda-speech/ https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2014/today-in-medi... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIhy0T7Q48Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIhy0T7Q48Y We can see the same thing with other newer media; Ex. video games. I don't have solutions per se, though I wish this pattern could be different. The profit motive and appealing to base instinct seems to always "win".

MSFT_Edging 3y ago
I'm aware it should be expected. The target of my comment is specifically the "well profit=good" crowd on here. It's to point out the innate contradiction in how we speak about technology compared to the guaranteed outcome in our system. We're doomed as a species if we keep believing in the magical market as a primary mover for said species. We'll stall in a circlejerk of ads and stock buybacks and never accomplish anything, because any good use for technology is locked behind a gate due to the lack of profit. Any improvement in medicine is behind lock and key because the pharmaceutical companies "need to make back their investment" despite massive gov funding. We're killing ourselves here with the spectacle that this system is either working or worth saving.
- stateofinquiry 3y ago
  True points, and I apologize for missing you actual point and wandering off a bit. We probably need another social model for technological development specifically- but I am not sure what it might be. If there is anything useful to salvage from my previous its that this issue has been with us for a long while.
  - MSFT_Edging 3y ago
    I think amazing gains could be made if we ripped the bandaid off and took all the weapons manufacturers and other gov contractors and used that brain power entirely for darpa style public works projects. Our current military industrial project is just a self fulfilling fantasy. Stop the contracts for war, create contracts and research for moving humanity forward without the need to strap it to a missile 20 years before it hits shelves. Keep IP rights publicly owned, license them to anyone and use the licensing fees to fund new research.

Aloisius 3y ago

One could make a similar argument about every other major technological advance in history. I’m not sure why people seem to believe AI is different or special or what leads them to believe you can stop it anymore than the automated loom or the combine harvester.

MSFT_Edging 3y ago
Given the invention of the cotton gin, the slave owners should have been clubbed to death and the technology not used to make slavery more enticing but to improve productivity to reduce level of effort and provide more free time. This can be translated to modern day.