In my book I write, “Can a bridge decide to collapse?” The whole “Oh no, our models went rogue” thing … When a bridge collapses, you don’t analyze whether the bridge was ethical or sentient or why it decided to collapse. You ask, who is the person who built this bridge to be so flimsy? There are permits you have to acquire. There are supposed to be tests. When you ask about the bridge collapsing itself, you’ve lost the thread.
Quite a good quote.
I also like her observations about lawmakers reacting to media coverage of AI breakthroughs and not listening to people from the fields where the supposed breakthroughs have happend (like with the maths problem recently).
Let’s say the AI doomers are right.
This is still like, 7th or 8th in line of “currently dangerous existential threats to human civilization.”
There is ZERO sense in feeling threatened by autonomous rogue killbots when we’re going to have unaccountable, non-rogue ones supplementing the unaccountable, sentient HUMAN killbots we already have in just a few years, and even if THOSE don’t get you, the 50 degree temperatures will, since you can’t run your AC because the AI data centers have made your electric bill $500, and you can’t go to the pool because the clouds of ash from the uncontrolled wildfires have made the air unbreathable.
It’s my baseless conspiracy theory, but I am starting to believe all these AI “whistleblowers” are just being paid a secret severance bonus to get cut loose and drum up fear/interest in AI.
World’s crappiest Frankenfurter cosplay.
Literally stop trying to pretend that executing LLM output in a loop with no supervision makes sense.
I’m trying to read the actual article but it seems like it is only for subscribers. Yet it seems like everyone has an opinion on the matter. Either all of you have subscription on the site, or you are pretending you know what you are talking about, no offense. To me this proves that people don’t care about what really happened, they just read the clickbait headline and move to the next one. Which is alright if your intention is not to publicly express your conclusions.
There is a 10-hr old comment with a link to the archived article, i.e. past the pay wall.
If you disable javascript the article is readable or you can use the archive.is link shared in the comments.
https://archive.is/DMknL
beyond paywall https://archive.is/DMknL
This feels like it has been obvious for years to anyone paying attention.
This one never seems to get stale.
The other fun AI project is processing mass surveillance data to route out and dispose of dissenters capable of organizing an effective resistance.
Since they ultimately intend to do to the world population what the US did to Native American tribes and the slaves imported from Africa, we’d best hurry up and get organized.
This new batch of ultra-wealthy regard commoners as non-person NPCs even more than antebellum plantation owners or Nazis in the German Reich.
It’s fearmongering intended to push regulation to ban foreign models (i.e., competition) and locally run ones, and to prevent new AI companies from gaining traction, thus guaranteeing a monopoly for the current subscription based ones.
Also to “place limits on how powerful the models can be”, so they have an excuse when they reach the limits of what LLMs are capable of or model collapse starts making them worse, whatever comes first.
In both cases, futile attempts at ensuring their survival once the bubble bursts.
Also, astroturfing. Marketing. Making their models look more powerful. Dangling forbidden fruit in front of their customers and their competitors’ in order to entice them, feed their AI psychosis, and strengthen their addiction.
The doom talk gives AI user base a hard-on and Anthropic knows it. It’s like saying, your web browser is now equipped with the power of plutonium. You are controlling something powerful and dangerous as you work to nudify your neighbor or slop out of your term paper.
we absolutely need to separate people who LARP AI safety and people who sincerely care about AI safety. there are absolutely a ton of people who doom talk AI as a way to hype it, or as a way to regulatory capture to secure their position. what they do is in some sense poisoning the well cause now when people who really care about AI safety talk about existential risks, they get lumped together with the disingenuous LARPers and dismissed.
listen to what they advocate. do they really want to stop all AI development, or just a so-called “slow-down”? do they want to ban all AI models, or just the “open-source”/“Chinese” ones?
One easy way is if they work for an Ai company or stand to make money in any way from an AI company they are absolutely full of shit.
At this point, there’s so much bullshit from both sides on this issue that I don’t trust any of them.
- I don’t trust the anti-AI crowd, because they are just interested burying their head in the sand and pretending the technology never existed, despite its benefits.
- I don’t trust the ones who call for regulation, because far too much money is sloshing around in the political pool, and they would just push this half-hearted bill to “ban the Chinese models” without any real regulation on the US side.
- I don’t trust the tech bros who can’t wait to fire half of their workforce for a shareholder circlejerk, instead of using all of that increased productivity to fix all of the bugs and mountain of tickets their developers face every day.
- I don’t trust the US AI cabal who willing participates in a circular multi-trillion-dollar Ponzi scheme that actively damages the global economy and many of them are sucking on enough copeium to be classified as its own atmosphere.
- I don’t even trust the Chinese, who despite playing the part of the gigachad in this fucked up story with its open source and genuinely useful models, are still playing the best strategy they have to promote their own communist dictatorship, and they might well end up on top in the long term.
Cory Doctorow shared the exact same opinion in this interview he gave this week. I personally don’t think his “reverse centaur” idea is nearly as catchy or worth adopting as enshittification was, but the intent behind it is spot on.
Reverse centaur is a terrible term. Even having heard it explained, repeatedly, I could not even explain what it means. It’s not catchy, too many weird syllables; the word “centaur” makes it sound nerdy as fuck for any casual use, I doubt most normal people even remember what a centaur is; and it just does not immediately convey it’s meaning as a result.
Robot’s bitch?
It’s very simple: a computer controlling a human as a flesh robot instead of the other way around.
Think Amazon drivers, for instance. No autonomy whatsoever, no thinking, no decisions, just eyes, feet, and hands for the machine.
Late stage capitalism existential / body horror, and a wet dream for corporations.
I have no doubt our generation and later will never retire. They’ll just plug a chip into our nape and keep our corpses working until they fall apart. 40K was off by 38 centuries.
I liked the term “meat puppet” more; though it’s a little morbid
What is it even supposed to mean?
centaur: brain of a man, speed of a horse. reverse centaur: brain of a horse, speed of a man.
but the horse is the computer.
The horse is the computer…?
Yeah, basically. lime’s summary was rather curt, but basically accurate. He explains his intent really well in the interview I linked above, or I assume you can find his writing or text-based interviews somewhere online. Here’s a mostly-good summary of the idea in a review of his book on the topic:
A centaur, in automation theory, is someone assisted by a machine, whether using a hearing aid or driving a car. A reverse centaur is someone whose freedom is diminished by the demands of a machine, like an Amazon warehouse worker. The technology of AI theoretically allows every worker to be a centaur, but the business model demands the reverse. Take radiology. In the centaur scenario, a human radiologist works with an AI radiologist to produce more accurate analysis, but that costs the hospital money. In the reverse centaur version, the AI radiologist demotes the surviving humans to the level of results-checking drones who are more likely to make mistakes. Much cheaper, but you see the problem.
In the centaur scenario, the human radiologist is basically doing their job as they do now, but occasionally the AI might pop in and say “hey, check that one a bit closer”. It helps them find possible errors they’ve made. The reverse centaur reduces the human’s job to in theory validating the AI’s results, but because of a phenomenon called “cognitive surrender”—which has been talked about since before AI but has become very popular over the last year or two—they end up just ticking “yes”. Think Homer Simpson in that episode where he works from home and uses a drinking bird toy to just press “y”. The human is providing the “leg work”, so to speak, for the AI’s thinking.
(and before anyone comments on it. alt+0151. I’ve been using em dashes regularly since like 2009, and I refuse to let AI steal that from me.)
you do the manual labour while the computer makes the decisions.
It’s in the computer?
The computer is the horse
Ah, of course.
of course
brain of a horse, speed of a man.
This is wrong on so many levels. We wouldn’t bother even using LLMs if they are were merely the “speed of a man”. And anybody who’s bothered to actually use the technology can tell you that’s it doesn’t have the “brain of a horse”.
Human review is still important, but the depth of knowledge they have is pretty damn advanced. The moment you completely remove the human element is where everything falls apart.
it’s simplified for a comment on lemmy made to be funny. i didn’t want the get into the mentality of the human-tool gestalt here. read doctorows explanation instead.
Doctorow tries to coin shit all the time and most times it doesn’t stick. This goes faaaaaar back in his personal history.
I think this the way the powers that be control many narratives. Many distractions running all over.
People aren’t critical enough about what they’re echoing from what they think is coming from their own side.
deleted by creator
Since when is Howard Stern one of AIs fiercest critics?
Also, who fucking cares about Howard Stern’s opinion on AI?
