3 ms·

I was enjoying the article until I got to this paragraph: > Individual intelligence will mean nothing once we have superhuman AI, at which point the difference

I was enjoying the article until I got to this paragraph: > Individual intelligence will mean nothing once we have superhuman AI, at which point the difference between an obscenely talented giga-nerd and an ordinary six-pack-drinking bozo will be about as meaningful as the difference between any two ants. If what you do involves anything related to the human capacity for reason, reflection, insight, creativity, or thought, you will be meat for the coltan mines. Believing this feels incredibly unwise to me. I think it's going to do more damage than the AI itself will. To any impressionable students reading this: the most valuable and important thing you can learn will be to think critically and communicate well. No AI can take it away from you, and the more powerful AI will get the more you will be able to harness it's potential. Don't let these people saying this ahit discourage you from building a good life.

jcgrillo 8mo ago
In the context of the rest of the piece, I read this as sarcasm. The author is making fun of the species of narcissistic silly con valley techbro who actually believes such nonsense.
- FloorEgg 8mo ago
  Ah, I struggle with sarcasm sometimes and I was a bit distracted while reading. I'll give it another chance.
  - kerblang 8mo ago
    I suspect the author is struggling with their own sarcasm.
  - TSiege 8mo ago
    It is not sarcasm he is fleshing out this sentence earlier in the paragraph, "One of the pervasive new doctrines of Silicon Valley is that we’re in the early stages of a bifurcation event"
    - jcgrillo 8mo ago
      Right, but in the context of this article about these wretched enfents terribles, and later when we get to the rationalist termite colony, it's clearly something to chuckle at. Like, the fact that people think this "bifurcation event" idea is real is legitimately funny.
      - TSiege 8mo ago
        I see your point, but I don't think he's being sarcastic in this paragraph. To me this paragraph isn't sarcasm rather he's presently a serious factual recounting of the logic driving AI evangelists that he then undermines by contrasting it with the callousness, messiness, and illogic of the people pushing this narrative. (I too had a good chuckle at the termite description) But this is veering into lit crit territory, so agree to disagree
        jcgrillo 8mo ago
        You may have a point! And you've given me a great excuse to read this one again later this evening :)
- zozbot234 8mo ago
  It's a really bad take because AI is already "superhuman" in general knowledge, but it still has trouble figuring out whether I should drive or walk to the car wash place.
  - moritzwarhier 8mo ago
    Declaring something as "superhuman" requires a hierarchy of inherent human value. I'm not saying this for social reasons, just for the definition: "superhuman intelligence" at what? Calculations? Puzzles? Sudokus? Or more like... image classification? ("is this a thief?", "is this a rope?", "is this a medical professional?", "is this a tree?") Oh, applying the former to the latter would be a pretty stupid category error. It's almost as if people had this figured out centuries ago...
- moritzwarhier 8mo ago
  There's no worth in sarcastically repeating memes like "giga nerd" or whatever except for propagating this line if thinking / the meme. Imagination knows no negation.
drivebyhooting 8mo ago
This part was a long description of the zeitgeist in SF; it was not meant to be the author’s own opinion.
- FloorEgg 8mo ago
  I realize that now, and feel a bit foolish for being triggered by it. It's too late for me to edit my comment now though.
  - DontForgetMe 8mo ago
    I think your reflexive disagreement is a testimony to the point of the article. And the fact that you didn't immediately notice what was the authors view vs what they were relaying, may be testimony to the author's good writing. I found it to be an unexpectedly evocative piece, a kind of poetic prose style that I don't see very often in journalism, let alone tech journalism. Each word seemed carefully chosen to make the reader almost fell like they were there, witnessing, understanding. So, I can imagine the author being a little pleased that you reacted to that passage with a sudden skepticism. Seems like a very successful case of 'show, don't tell'.
MarceliusK 8mo ago
Historically, tools that made thinking cheaper didn't eliminate thinkers...
mayhemducks 8mo ago
"the most valuable and important thing you can learn will be to think critically and communicate well." I have heard some form this advice for over 30 years. Not one single penny I have earned in my career came from my critical thinking. It came from someone taking a big financial risk with the hope that they will come out ahead. In fact, I've had jobs that actively discouraged critical thinking. I have also been told that the advice to think critically wasn't meant for me.
- bitwize 8mo ago
  Critical thinking is slave mentality, man. Master mentality, the mentality of the guys who FUCK, is knowing that what you want to happen WILL happen and doing everything you can to make it happen. /s if not obvious
  - mayhemducks 8mo ago
    Thanks Timmy.
- dyauspitr 8mo ago
  Critical, individualistic thinking is what the west does best. The east seems to be better at implementation and improvement once provided with a new idea. That’s where we currently stand atleast, who knows how China will do in the future. Maybe they’re the total package but that remains to be seen.
  - FloorEgg 8mo ago
    Why conflate critical thinking with individualistic values? It seems you are unnecessarily muddying the water.
    - dyauspitr 8mo ago
      In my opinion there is a correlation there. I think individualistic societies are better at thinking of new paradigm shifting ideas.
iugtmkbdfil834 8mo ago
<< Believing this feels incredibly unwise to me. This. Just thinking that those with power would even allow that leveling seems on the verge of impossible. In a sense, you can already see it practice. Online models are carefully 'made safe' ( neutered is my preferred term ), while online inference is increasingly more expensive. And that does not even account for whether, 'bozo' will be able to use the tool right.. because an expert with a tool will steal beat a non-expert. It is a brain race. It may differ in details, but the shape remains very much the same.
tonnydourado 8mo ago
I don't think that this is supposed to be a statement of the author's beliefs. The whole article is dripping with contempt for AI bros and silicon valley culture in general. Maybe if you read past these paragraph it would have been clearer?
- FloorEgg 8mo ago
  Yep you're right, but it's too late for me to edit my comment. The idea triggered me, and I tend to struggle with sarcasm.
dyauspitr 8mo ago
I mean it’s theoretically true. Will we get there? Who knows. The first time an LLM solves a truly significant, longstanding problem without help is when we will know we are at AGI.
coldtea 8mo ago
>No AI can take it away from you, and the more powerful AI will get the more you will be able to harness it's potential. The author is describing it, not necessarily ensorsing it. But whether they really believe this or not, the point is that most wouldn't be given any opportunity to "harness is potential", whether they're "obscenely talented giga-nerds" or not, because they'd be economically redundant.
- FloorEgg 8mo ago
  And that point is foolish no matter who is making it.
  - coldtea 8mo ago
    There's no shortage of masses of people have been made econonically redundant across the world the past decades, even before AI, no matter how smart or creative they are.
    - FloorEgg 8mo ago
      That's not true. You're going to have to bring some strong evidence to convince me of that. I've been around and paying attention for a few decades and what you just said contradicts everything I know.

jcgrillo 8mo ago

In the context of the rest of the piece, I read this as sarcasm. The author is making fun of the species of narcissistic silly con valley techbro who actually believes such nonsense.

FloorEgg 8mo ago
Ah, I struggle with sarcasm sometimes and I was a bit distracted while reading. I'll give it another chance.
- kerblang 8mo ago
  I suspect the author is struggling with their own sarcasm.
- TSiege 8mo ago
  It is not sarcasm he is fleshing out this sentence earlier in the paragraph, "One of the pervasive new doctrines of Silicon Valley is that we’re in the early stages of a bifurcation event"
  - jcgrillo 8mo ago
    Right, but in the context of this article about these wretched enfents terribles, and later when we get to the rationalist termite colony, it's clearly something to chuckle at. Like, the fact that people think this "bifurcation event" idea is real is legitimately funny.
    - TSiege 8mo ago
      I see your point, but I don't think he's being sarcastic in this paragraph. To me this paragraph isn't sarcasm rather he's presently a serious factual recounting of the logic driving AI evangelists that he then undermines by contrasting it with the callousness, messiness, and illogic of the people pushing this narrative. (I too had a good chuckle at the termite description) But this is veering into lit crit territory, so agree to disagree
      - jcgrillo 8mo ago
        You may have a point! And you've given me a great excuse to read this one again later this evening :)
zozbot234 8mo ago
It's a really bad take because AI is already "superhuman" in general knowledge, but it still has trouble figuring out whether I should drive or walk to the car wash place.
- moritzwarhier 8mo ago
  Declaring something as "superhuman" requires a hierarchy of inherent human value. I'm not saying this for social reasons, just for the definition: "superhuman intelligence" at what? Calculations? Puzzles? Sudokus? Or more like... image classification? ("is this a thief?", "is this a rope?", "is this a medical professional?", "is this a tree?") Oh, applying the former to the latter would be a pretty stupid category error. It's almost as if people had this figured out centuries ago...
moritzwarhier 8mo ago
There's no worth in sarcastically repeating memes like "giga nerd" or whatever except for propagating this line if thinking / the meme. Imagination knows no negation.

drivebyhooting 8mo ago

This part was a long description of the zeitgeist in SF; it was not meant to be the author’s own opinion.

FloorEgg 8mo ago
I realize that now, and feel a bit foolish for being triggered by it. It's too late for me to edit my comment now though.
- DontForgetMe 8mo ago
  I think your reflexive disagreement is a testimony to the point of the article. And the fact that you didn't immediately notice what was the authors view vs what they were relaying, may be testimony to the author's good writing. I found it to be an unexpectedly evocative piece, a kind of poetic prose style that I don't see very often in journalism, let alone tech journalism. Each word seemed carefully chosen to make the reader almost fell like they were there, witnessing, understanding. So, I can imagine the author being a little pleased that you reacted to that passage with a sudden skepticism. Seems like a very successful case of 'show, don't tell'.

MarceliusK 8mo ago

Historically, tools that made thinking cheaper didn't eliminate thinkers...

mayhemducks 8mo ago

"the most valuable and important thing you can learn will be to think critically and communicate well." I have heard some form this advice for over 30 years. Not one single penny I have earned in my career came from my critical thinking. It came from someone taking a big financial risk with the hope that they will come out ahead. In fact, I've had jobs that actively discouraged critical thinking. I have also been told that the advice to think critically wasn't meant for me.

bitwize 8mo ago
Critical thinking is slave mentality, man. Master mentality, the mentality of the guys who FUCK, is knowing that what you want to happen WILL happen and doing everything you can to make it happen. /s if not obvious
- mayhemducks 8mo ago
  Thanks Timmy.
dyauspitr 8mo ago
Critical, individualistic thinking is what the west does best. The east seems to be better at implementation and improvement once provided with a new idea. That’s where we currently stand atleast, who knows how China will do in the future. Maybe they’re the total package but that remains to be seen.
- FloorEgg 8mo ago
  Why conflate critical thinking with individualistic values? It seems you are unnecessarily muddying the water.
  - dyauspitr 8mo ago
    In my opinion there is a correlation there. I think individualistic societies are better at thinking of new paradigm shifting ideas.

iugtmkbdfil834 8mo ago

<< Believing this feels incredibly unwise to me. This. Just thinking that those with power would even allow that leveling seems on the verge of impossible. In a sense, you can already see it practice. Online models are carefully 'made safe' ( neutered is my preferred term ), while online inference is increasingly more expensive. And that does not even account for whether, 'bozo' will be able to use the tool right.. because an expert with a tool will steal beat a non-expert. It is a brain race. It may differ in details, but the shape remains very much the same.

tonnydourado 8mo ago

I don't think that this is supposed to be a statement of the author's beliefs. The whole article is dripping with contempt for AI bros and silicon valley culture in general. Maybe if you read past these paragraph it would have been clearer?

FloorEgg 8mo ago
Yep you're right, but it's too late for me to edit my comment. The idea triggered me, and I tend to struggle with sarcasm.

dyauspitr 8mo ago

I mean it’s theoretically true. Will we get there? Who knows. The first time an LLM solves a truly significant, longstanding problem without help is when we will know we are at AGI.

coldtea 8mo ago

>No AI can take it away from you, and the more powerful AI will get the more you will be able to harness it's potential. The author is describing it, not necessarily ensorsing it. But whether they really believe this or not, the point is that most wouldn't be given any opportunity to "harness is potential", whether they're "obscenely talented giga-nerds" or not, because they'd be economically redundant.

FloorEgg 8mo ago
And that point is foolish no matter who is making it.
- coldtea 8mo ago
  There's no shortage of masses of people have been made econonically redundant across the world the past decades, even before AI, no matter how smart or creative they are.
  - FloorEgg 8mo ago
    That's not true. You're going to have to bring some strong evidence to convince me of that. I've been around and paying attention for a few decades and what you just said contradicts everything I know.