4 ms·

"simply pass even more laws to block inbound china traffic, apply more sanctions." .. like an eu/us "firewall"? so "they" can have their AI that makes new mole

by fvv 2y ago

"simply pass even more laws to block inbound china traffic, apply more sanctions." .. like an eu/us "firewall"? so "they" can have their AI that makes new molecules, new medicines, new materials, increases productivity by 5x , in the meantime should we separate all the scientific research papers because otherwise they will devour us? , so we move backwards but are we giving $5 more to everyone who wrote a book that no one has read? so they can buy the chinese vpn to access their ai to write the next book for the next 5$ ?

fvv 2y ago
to remain on t he topic... obv. those 5$ would also go to all youtube channels gosh, those could also be 30$ if you really want to split revenue more equally, so everyone could be 30$ richer and open ai and all newcomers under that legislation could be dead, yeah probably we'll specialize on niche , small, and costly ai each with their limited and licensed dataset
Moldoteck 2y ago
yes, they will have own models, we will have own models (if the law permits, since not every usecase should be allowed). Even the productivity increase by 5x must be approached carefully, like what if it causes massive unemployment (since ppl working on automated jobs will suddenly be out of working field and will not be able to adapt/switch to other areas fast enough and be homeless as result). Some regulations are/can be bad, but other must be put in place to avoid unwanted consequences. The unbounded capitalism at all cost is a thing in US but not in EU and even less in China. What strikes me, why do you think that EU/US can't do all this stuff if they put in place some regulations (like molecules,medicines,materials, etc...)? Regulations (normally) should limit only a subset of usecases while allowing others, don't you think it's a normal approach instead of letting big corpos suck for free any public data(be it copyrighted or personal) and act unbounded while profiting from this? We know what corporate greed is, look at the insulin price in US vs EU, why don't you think that the same will happen with AI tools/corpos?

by fvv 2y ago

fvv 2y ago

to remain on t he topic... obv. those 5$ would also go to all youtube channels gosh, those could also be 30$ if you really want to split revenue more equally, so everyone could be 30$ richer and open ai and all newcomers under that legislation could be dead, yeah probably we'll specialize on niche , small, and costly ai each with their limited and licensed dataset

Moldoteck 2y ago

yes, they will have own models, we will have own models (if the law permits, since not every usecase should be allowed). Even the productivity increase by 5x must be approached carefully, like what if it causes massive unemployment (since ppl working on automated jobs will suddenly be out of working field and will not be able to adapt/switch to other areas fast enough and be homeless as result). Some regulations are/can be bad, but other must be put in place to avoid unwanted consequences. The unbounded capitalism at all cost is a thing in US but not in EU and even less in China. What strikes me, why do you think that EU/US can't do all this stuff if they put in place some regulations (like molecules,medicines,materials, etc...)? Regulations (normally) should limit only a subset of usecases while allowing others, don't you think it's a normal approach instead of letting big corpos suck for free any public data(be it copyrighted or personal) and act unbounded while profiting from this? We know what corporate greed is, look at the insulin price in US vs EU, why don't you think that the same will happen with AI tools/corpos?