4 ms·

I'm sure it will be done but I don't buy the version neither the timeline that AI-2027 promotes. Compreende?

FrustratedMonky 1y ago
Yes. All predictions are fiction. I understand that. Arguing over 5 years or 30, and some future improvement that is not exactly the LLMs of today. Not sure we are disagreeing on the eventuality.
- alganet 1y ago
  Do not be mistaken, we totally disagree. Not all predictions are fiction. I would not try to fit AI-2027 into a news article, you did. See? Disagreeing heavily here.
  - FrustratedMonky 1y ago
    "I'm sure it will be done " - alganet I must have misinterpreted this. I really don't want to argue around defending 2027. It is a speculative view. They say so themselves. But speculation on the future has been a valuable tool in the past. So not dismissing out of hand. These were researchers with some respectable credentials. Not simply fan fiction like Shades of Gray or something. As to news. There was an article, it matched a point in 2027, i made the connection. How is pointing out a similar connection or idea, invalid? 'fitting speculation into news' . Like no connections can ever be made?
    - alganet 1y ago
      Yes, you misinterpreted. It's a valid connection, I just found it to be in bad taste and I disagree on doing it.
      - FrustratedMonky 1y ago
        'bad taste'. The world is changing a lot. It is hard to keep up with social norms. -> A group publishes a white paper/forecast/speculation/theory -> News article comes out with something similar, related, seemingly a direct point. -> Making a link between the two is 'bad taste'. I'm not sure. Seems dubious to cast a natural human tendency as 'bad taste'. I think I'll go ahead keep making connections where they fit. To be fair, play devils advocate. I do agree this tendency can lead people to make crazy connections, and go down an internet rabbit whole of conspiracy. This just didn't seem to rise to that.
        alganet 1y ago
        Me: "This food is bad, tastes like shit" You: "Are you saying that cooking is wrong?" Me: "Cooking is fine, but this food is bad, tastes like shit" It's just that simple. You are free to eat shit if you want, and maybe the world is changing and eating shit will be in vogue soon, but I will continue disliking it.
        FrustratedMonky 1y ago
        Communicating is difficult. Something like 50% of text communications are misinterpreted. So AI 2027, itself is in 'poor taste', is 'shit'. Not the act of linking ideas in AI 2027 to a news article. Well. It's level of being shit, guess could still be debated. It makes a point of AI increasingly being used in decision making. And it is. So guess it depends on how much you're keeping up with current events whether you think this is really unlikely. Or how much you believe what is being reported. Or the degree that decision makers become dependent on AI, will it ever reach the levels as depicted in AI 2027 could be debated.
        alganet 1y ago
        > It makes a point of AI increasingly being used in decision making But that is nothing new. Everyone knows that. Go back to square one, my first comment, Terminator 3: Rise of The Machines. So, in what aspect AI-2027 is new? I can tell you. It bends its knees to some narratives: - It portrays LLMs as more advanced than they are. - It patronizes and antagonizes China. US technologies are portrayed as primordial, while Chinese ones are always copied and stolen. - It encourages viral sharing of those speculations as true. Now, by all means, I'm not defending China here. Also, I'm not praising US. I don't want these two to fight (nothing good will come out of it). The fact that AI-2027 takes that stance speculatively (those are not part of the "research" aspect of their work, they are "scenarios"), to me, tastes like shit. It is, in fact, debatable. Maybe you think antagonizing China and promoting private technologies beyond their capabilities is cool. I think it's shit. Now, again, go back to square two. Decision-making AI for real military use (not to improve their CRM software or PR) is likely coming from the likes of Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and so on. There is some aspect of cyberwarfare to LLM deployments, but the reality of it is not that obvious, and AI-2027 does nothing to explain how that plays out. In fact, it does much to keep the public away from how it could really play out. Misinterpreting is a technique. You can always introduce noise to a clear conversation. Maybe you already understand all that I'm saying (I'm an optimist), and is introducing noise and feigning misunderstanding to shepard the discussion towards a stalemate (you tried several times, like "not sure if we disagree"). Let me be very clear, again: we disagree a lot in a lot of things.

Yes. All predictions are fiction. I understand that. Arguing over 5 years or 30, and some future improvement that is not exactly the LLMs of today. Not sure we are disagreeing on the eventuality.

alganet 1y ago
Do not be mistaken, we totally disagree. Not all predictions are fiction. I would not try to fit AI-2027 into a news article, you did. See? Disagreeing heavily here.
- FrustratedMonky 1y ago
  "I'm sure it will be done " - alganet I must have misinterpreted this. I really don't want to argue around defending 2027. It is a speculative view. They say so themselves. But speculation on the future has been a valuable tool in the past. So not dismissing out of hand. These were researchers with some respectable credentials. Not simply fan fiction like Shades of Gray or something. As to news. There was an article, it matched a point in 2027, i made the connection. How is pointing out a similar connection or idea, invalid? 'fitting speculation into news' . Like no connections can ever be made?
  - alganet 1y ago
    Yes, you misinterpreted. It's a valid connection, I just found it to be in bad taste and I disagree on doing it.
    - FrustratedMonky 1y ago
      'bad taste'. The world is changing a lot. It is hard to keep up with social norms. -> A group publishes a white paper/forecast/speculation/theory -> News article comes out with something similar, related, seemingly a direct point. -> Making a link between the two is 'bad taste'. I'm not sure. Seems dubious to cast a natural human tendency as 'bad taste'. I think I'll go ahead keep making connections where they fit. To be fair, play devils advocate. I do agree this tendency can lead people to make crazy connections, and go down an internet rabbit whole of conspiracy. This just didn't seem to rise to that.
      - alganet 1y ago
        Me: "This food is bad, tastes like shit" You: "Are you saying that cooking is wrong?" Me: "Cooking is fine, but this food is bad, tastes like shit" It's just that simple. You are free to eat shit if you want, and maybe the world is changing and eating shit will be in vogue soon, but I will continue disliking it.
        FrustratedMonky 1y ago
        Communicating is difficult. Something like 50% of text communications are misinterpreted. So AI 2027, itself is in 'poor taste', is 'shit'. Not the act of linking ideas in AI 2027 to a news article. Well. It's level of being shit, guess could still be debated. It makes a point of AI increasingly being used in decision making. And it is. So guess it depends on how much you're keeping up with current events whether you think this is really unlikely. Or how much you believe what is being reported. Or the degree that decision makers become dependent on AI, will it ever reach the levels as depicted in AI 2027 could be debated.
        alganet 1y ago
        > It makes a point of AI increasingly being used in decision making But that is nothing new. Everyone knows that. Go back to square one, my first comment, Terminator 3: Rise of The Machines. So, in what aspect AI-2027 is new? I can tell you. It bends its knees to some narratives: - It portrays LLMs as more advanced than they are. - It patronizes and antagonizes China. US technologies are portrayed as primordial, while Chinese ones are always copied and stolen. - It encourages viral sharing of those speculations as true. Now, by all means, I'm not defending China here. Also, I'm not praising US. I don't want these two to fight (nothing good will come out of it). The fact that AI-2027 takes that stance speculatively (those are not part of the "research" aspect of their work, they are "scenarios"), to me, tastes like shit. It is, in fact, debatable. Maybe you think antagonizing China and promoting private technologies beyond their capabilities is cool. I think it's shit. Now, again, go back to square two. Decision-making AI for real military use (not to improve their CRM software or PR) is likely coming from the likes of Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and so on. There is some aspect of cyberwarfare to LLM deployments, but the reality of it is not that obvious, and AI-2027 does nothing to explain how that plays out. In fact, it does much to keep the public away from how it could really play out. Misinterpreting is a technique. You can always introduce noise to a clear conversation. Maybe you already understand all that I'm saying (I'm an optimist), and is introducing noise and feigning misunderstanding to shepard the discussion towards a stalemate (you tried several times, like "not sure if we disagree"). Let me be very clear, again: we disagree a lot in a lot of things.