• technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    If these people actually cared about “saving humanity”, they would be attacking car dependency, pollution, waste, etc.

    Not making a shitty cliff notes machine.

  • Allonzee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Humanity is surrounding itself with its own self-inflicted destruction.

    All in the name of not only tolerated avarice, but celebrated avarice.

    Greed is a more effectively harmful human impulse than even hate. We’ve merely been propagandized to ignore greed, oh im sorry “rational self-interest,” as being the personal failing and character deficit it is.

    • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      greed coupled with high ambition is the biggest problem. neither on its own is as destructive

    • Boozilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Empathy and decency are scarce precious commodities. But the ruthless predatory “thought leaders” have been in charge ever since we clubbed the last neanderthal.

      “It Was Just Business” should be engraved on whatever memorial is left behind to mark our self-extinction.

      • Allonzee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I completely agree and have made similar points about that being our species’ epitaph.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Extinction by AI takeover or robot apocalypse does seem cooler than extinction by pollution rendering then environment uninhabitable.

    I’d rather not go extinct at all, but if we’re fucked regardless.

  • Veedem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I mean is this stuff even really AI? It has no awareness of what it’s saying. It’s simply calculating the most probable next word in a typical sentence and spewing it out. I’m not sure this is the tech that will decide humanity is unnecessary.

    It’s just rebranded machine learning, IMO.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      The problem is that it is capable of doing things that historically wasn’t possible with a machine. It can “act natural” in a sense.

      There are so many cans of worms

    • erwan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      OK, generative AI isn’t machine learning.

      But to get back to what AI is, the definition has been moving forever as AI becomes “just software” when it becomes ubiquitous. People were shocked that machines could calculate, then that they can play chess better than humans, then that they can read handwriting…

      The first mistake have been to invent the term to start with, as it implies thinking machine but they’re not.

      Or as Dijkstra puts it: “asking whether a machine can think is as dumb as asking if a submarine can swim”.

      • blurg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Or as Dijkstra puts it: “asking whether a machine can think is as dumb as asking if a submarine can swim”.

        Alan Turing puts it similarly, the question is nonsense. However, if you define “machine” and “thinking”, and redefine the question to mean: is machine thinking differentiable from human thinking; you can answer affirmatively, theoretically (rough paraphrasing). Though the current evidence suggests otherwise (e.g. AI learning from other AI drifts toward nonsense).

        For more, see: Computing Machinery and Intelligence, and Turing’s original paper (which goes into the Imitation Game).

    • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Supposedly they found a new method (Q*) that significantly improved their models, enough to make some key people revolt to force the company to not monetize it out of ethical concern. Those people have been pushed out ofc.

  • WhatIsThePointAnyway@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Capitalism doesn’t care about humanity, only profits. Any safeguards self imposed will always fall to profitability in a capitalist system. It’s why regulations and a government people trust are important.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      But, according to Das Kapital (and the last two centuries) capitalists will always capture the government and regulators, neutering their ability to fulfill their role. Greed and the susceptibility to corruption will always drive the system to where it is today, in which only revolution will free us from the established system.

      But even then, civil war rarely heralds a communist revolution, but usually a run of dictatorships, each overthrown by the next. We have to get very lucky or be tired of fighting before we can install a public serving state. And we haven’t yet tried pre-writing and publishing the new constitution.