Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Makes perfect sense. People don’t really need to have jobs to buy your shit do they?

 

I randomly met Amazons head of global HR a while back. I’ll text her for a comment. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Chopper said:

the first article is from January, the second from today

 

I remember the Apple fiasco. There were theories that Apple was using a form of RAG and screwing up the chunking of news sources as well being too loose with the parameters to make the summaries sound original. All of which is a recipe for hallucinations. 

Generative AI when not properly parameterized and grounded can get a bad case of Munchausen syndrome. This shit is so in the early stages of being developed companies should not be rolling it out as a service.

 

Posted
8 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Very cool we're letting this antisocial dipshit shape the entire future of humankind. 

Hey man, he's a rich guy so by the law of the land he can do whatever he wants. Haven't you been paying attention? Something something job creation by destruction 

  • Rage+1 2
Posted

The utter contempt these people have for.....human beings....is fucking maddening.

These are literally the LAST sociopathic assholes any sane person would want in charge of shaping society, and we've handed them the reins with functionally no checks or restrictions.  It's fucking suicidal.  These people are flat-out evil.  The word and concept "evil" have existed through eternity for just these sorts of people and situations, and our leaders--social, political, functionally everyone--are just happily handing them the keys to humanity with nothing to restrain them.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 2
Posted (edited)

A lot of you AI doomers are giving "Electricity is a deadly and scary new technology" in the 1900's. Won't someone think of the candlemakers and the wax engineers!

CDN media

eta: real anti-electricity cartoon of the 1900s by great-great-great grandpa Brisket DeLedgio

Edited by Vegas64
Posted
Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

shawshank-redemption-how-can-you-be-so-o

This.  If you don't see the stacked club/sit sandwich here:

- aim is to eliminate a huge chunk of jobs, with no sort of replacement, benefiting only a handful of oligarchs who will save even more money and thus make more profit

- AI has no real ethical guardrails.  They say it does, and pay lip service to it, but they are doing all they can to create a system that would reach conclusions like "to help humanity, half of humanity has to die," and THE OLIGARCHS AGREE WITH THAT ANSWER.  They have literally said so.

- AI is simultaneously driving 93% of our GDP growth....while also being largely based on pie-in-the-sky "potential" AND self-funded investment (AI companies invest money in buying their own product, so they can show both 1) capital investment and 2) revenue on their financials, counting the same dollar in each category)

And more.

But let's listen to oligarchs who have openly said they don't care if we die in droves, who say that "empathy is evil," etc.  They clearly seem to have our best interests in mind.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Vegas64 said:

A lot of you AI doomers are giving "Electricity is a deadly and scary new technology" in the 1900's. Won't someone think of the candlemakers and the wax engineers!

CDN media

eta: real anti-electricity cartoon of the 1900s by great-great-great grandpa Brisket DeLedgio

I'm old enough to remember the "internet" hysteria.  It was going to end tens of millions of jobs.  Conversely it created hundreds of millions over the decades.  

Altman is correct in that many jobs are duplicative and unnecessary.  AI is going to end some of these.  I'm sure there were thousands of farriers that were not super happy with the advent of the automobile.  I remember as a kid the "Britannica" guy who sold us our first set.  Overall, it's transformative process.  Not outright elimination.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
33 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  If you don't see the stacked club/sit sandwich here:

- aim is to eliminate a huge chunk of jobs, with no sort of replacement, benefiting only a handful of oligarchs who will save even more money and thus make more profit

- AI has no real ethical guardrails.  They say it does, and pay lip service to it, but they are doing all they can to create a system that would reach conclusions like "to help humanity, half of humanity has to die," and THE OLIGARCHS AGREE WITH THAT ANSWER.  They have literally said so.

- AI is simultaneously driving 93% of our GDP growth....while also being largely based on pie-in-the-sky "potential" AND self-funded investment (AI companies invest money in buying their own product, so they can show both 1) capital investment and 2) revenue on their financials, counting the same dollar in each category)

And more.

But let's listen to oligarchs who have openly said they don't care if we die in droves, who say that "empathy is evil," etc.  They clearly seem to have our best interests in mind.

How is what you are saying ANY different than any other time in history when we've been confronted with a monumental shift via a technological disruption (or revolution, as they are typically called e.g. Industrial, PC, Mobile, and now AI)?

Seriously you are just playing the same hits that the doomers of those times played but with a modern backing track and click timer in your ear to keep the beat a little better. 

I'm actually astonished at how so many folks who claim to be progressive are full of fear with the progession of technology. 

As Dr. Malcolm once said, er, um, erhm, uhhh.....[after massive societal disruptions and advancements and growing pains, American Society and] life will find a way."

11 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I'm old enough to remember the "internet" hysteria.  It was going to end tens of millions of jobs.  Conversely it created hundreds of millions over the decades.  

Altman is correct in that many jobs are duplicative and unnecessary.  AI is going to end some of these.  I'm sure there were thousands of farriers that were not super happy with the advent of the automobile.  I remember as a kid the "Britannica" guy who sold us our first set.  Overall, it's transformative process.  Not outright elimination.  

It's like with physics and math, it's hard to breakthrough because you have to think about the problems and frameworks and what could be so differently than what currently is, and I think it's hard for most of us to visualize until hindsight is 20/20 when it comes to these truly disruptive times as aforementioned.

But hey,

Maybe, just maybe, this time is the different and this is REALLY the one-- the one time where we will extinct ourselves and truly be the downfall of human beings and ruin ourselves.

Also, maybe the next time someone gives an exact date and time the world is going to end they would be the first to be right as well.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

How is what you are saying ANY different than any other time in history when we've been confronted with a monumental shift via a technological disruption (or revolution, as they are typically called e.g. Industrial, PC, Mobile, and now AI)?

Seriously you are just playing the same hits that the doomers of those times played but with a modern backing track and click timer in your ear to keep the beat a little better. 

I'm actually astonished at how so many folks who claim to be progressive are full of fear with the progession of technology. 

As Dr. Malcolm once said, er, um, erhm, uhhh.....[after massive societal disruptions and advancements and growing pains, American Society and] life will find a way."

It's like with physics and math, it's hard to breakthrough because you have to think about the problems and frameworks and what could be so differently than what currently is, and I think it's hard for most of us to visualize until hindsight is 20/20 when it comes to these truly disruptive times as aforementioned.

But hey,

Maybe, just maybe, this time is the different and this is REALLY the one-- the one time where we will extinct ourselves and truly be the downfall of human beings and ruin ourselves.

Also, maybe the next time someone gives an exact date and time the world is going to end they would be the first to be right as well.

I'm still waiting on my flying car....

We'll see massive initial leaps in efficiency.  Paper pushers.  Compilers.  Researchers.  Analysts.  Reporting.  Forms and filings.  All that shit becomes instantaneous.  

At the end of the day, you're either on the credit or debit side of the balance sheet.  And for most that are on the debit side, what real value or savings is being realized by your work?  For many it's substantial, but not all.    

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

But hey,

Maybe, just maybe, this time is the different and this is REALLY the one-- the one time where we will extinct ourselves and truly be the downfall of human beings and ruin ourselves.

Also, maybe the next time someone gives an exact date and time the world is going to end they would be the first to be right as well.

I'm not as doom and gloom as most. However, if we look at the micro level and focus on the US only, it will be interesting to see how it shakes out here. After all in our current climate we have the least amount of safeguards when it comes to AI regulation, development, and overall job protection, especially compared to the EU and parts of Asia, for example.

Edited by YChang
Posted
1 minute ago, YChang said:

I'm not as doom and gloom as most. However, if we look at the micro level and focus on the US only, it will be interesting to see how it shakes out here. After all in our current climate we have the least amount of safeguards when it comes to AI regulation, development, and overall job protection, especially compared to the EU and parts of Asia, for example.

Which is why, it's been argued, we are the leaders....

Posted
5 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Which is why, it's been argued, we are the leaders....

<shrug> Leaders in making money? Sure. On that you might be right. We don't know yet when it comes to AI and its impact on society though. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I don’t know if the jury is out on the Internet. I think it has made America worse in a lot of ways: I think it’s played a big role in declining real standards of living for the average American, increased social polarization, increased social isolation, and more. I don’t think the marginal conveniences it brings to my day to day outweigh that. I think our society was objectively healthier in the late 1990s before broad consumer adoption.
 

  Maybe the Insta thots do make it worth it. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I don’t know if the jury is out on the Internet. I think it has made America worse in a lot of ways: I think it’s played a big role in declining real standards of living for the average American, increased social polarization, increased social isolation, and more. I don’t think the marginal conveniences it brings to my day to day outweigh that. I think our society was objectively healthier in the late 1990s before broad consumer adoption.
 

  Maybe the Insta thots do make it worth it. 

All I'm saying is the constant AI doom and gloom and ruining life and society, especially from old people and people of my generation, is giving the Mexican Fishing story, as the kids say. 

And I get it. At a certain age and disposition, I don't have the energy for the disruption. I'm old and tired and on the downside of the slope along with all the other old fogies on here, and I'm overrotating a little here today to be provocative, but the point is let's add some balance to the conversation. AI isn't going to usher in utopia, but it's also not going to be the fall of mankind. The doom feels unneccesary and even lazy at this point.

No matter what you believe, I think we all agree that AI is out of the tube and there is no way backwards. Boom, bust or otherwise.

Posted
6 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Very cool we're letting this antisocial dipshit shape the entire future of humankind. 

He'll be shocked when the pitchforks come out.  He better be reading up on his Aldous Huxley and figuring out how to keep the out-of-work masses placated.

Neil Postman wrote a book back in the 1980s talking about Huxley (contrasting with Brisketexan George Orwell's 1984) and summed it up nicely (decades before Facebook and streaming):

What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

For me it’s not the changing technology.  I’m fine with that.

What does piss me off about it is that it really isn’t good. It’s not really AI, it’s a glorified lookup service.

The masses are being sold on a bunch of snake oil, currently, with no end in sight.

It’s a start, sure, but what it is today is not sustainable, and not even close to what it should be.

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
3 hours ago, thunderlounge said:

For me it’s not the changing technology.  I’m fine with that.

What does piss me off about it is that it really isn’t good. It’s not really AI, it’s a glorified lookup service.

The masses are being sold on a bunch of snake oil, currently, with no end in sight.

It’s a start, sure, but what it is today is not sustainable, and not even close to what it should be.

Yes. The historic norm is that new technology results in certain jobs going away, but more  new jobs get created than old jobs get lost. It is unclear if the current "AI" products will follow that pattern. But my primary issues are:

(1) statements like those above suggesting the lost jobs weren't real jobs. That is ridiculous and incredibly disrespectful . If they weren't real jobs, there would have been no value in automating them. We shouldn't fall into the trap of diminishing the contributions of other people just because technology has found a way to automate their prior jobs. 

(2) The products being sold today aren't actually capable of doing the things they are sold as doing. They can kind of half ass do them, which is cool, but not really capable of replacing human labor. They are also very inefficient at certain tasks. But also absolutely believe there are tasks where they can enhance productivity. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Yes. The historic norm is that new technology results in certain jobs going away, but more  new jobs get created than old jobs get lost. It is unclear if the current "AI" products will follow that pattern. But my primary issues are:

(1) statements like those above suggesting the lost jobs weren't real jobs. That is ridiculous and incredibly disrespectful . If they weren't real jobs, there would have been no value in automating them. We shouldn't fall into the trap of diminishing the contributions of other people just because technology has found a way to automate their prior jobs. 

I don't see what new jobs are being created that can be filled by the people being replaced by automation/AI.

Waymo is clever and well-liked, but what new jobs will be created by people who were driving on the side (or even full-time taxi drivers)? And what happens to the people who helped develop Waymo when it reaches a point where it "learns" much more rapidly and has even more data, negating the need for some of the humans behind it? When Amazon has all of its warehouse hubs automated, where do those workers go, especially when other companies do the same?  What happens to Thelma down on 290 and South Congress when the sex bots arrive and can work 24/7?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
8 hours ago, Vegas64 said:

A lot of you AI doomers are giving "Electricity is a deadly and scary new technology" in the 1900's. Won't someone think of the candlemakers and the wax engineers!

 

Let's be honest, you don't know shit about fuck.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

What happens to Thelma down on 290 and South Congress when the sex bots arrive and can work 24/7?

Won't somebody think of South Austin's mom??

Posted
8 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Because productivity gains have ALWAYS benefitted workers and not the oligarchs right?

Gee.  If only we had any data to look at on that issue.  Wait, what's that, the past 4 decades provide dead-on data showing huge gains in productivity, with nearly zero of that benefit going to workers, and nearly all of it going to the top 1%?  Well golly gee, will wonders never cease?

  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
13 hours ago, F250 said:

Let's be honest, you don't know shit about fuck.

Of course I don't, nobody really does! That's also kind of the fun of living through such a disruption, it's such a fast moving and dynamic landscape we are living through that what you thought you knew yesterday could be wrong 6 months from now, and there is so much opportunity. Maybe I'm just a glass half full kind of guy as a predisposition though.

Posted
1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

oh-sure-john-candy.gif

That is CRAZY not just for all the reasons already stated, but also because of the popularity and trending 996 work schedule lately which seems to suggest the exact opposite?

I wonder what his angle is....

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Of course I don't, nobody really does!

DAE #bothsides?? JFC this plus your other posts in this thread have been whatever the opposite of "illuminating" is. You're falsely labeling reasoned and rational analysis of the unsustainable economics as "AI doomers" and asserting that "nobody really understands this" when that's only true among your MBA peers. 

There's not a huge groundswell of AI support, there's merely a monopsony in which openAI is (commited to) buying so many of NVDA's chips that it's distorting the market and causing massive inflation in other market segments. Power prices are through the roof, water resources are running dry, and companies like OpenAI, Cursor, Anthropic, et al are missing their profit targets by orders of magnetude. 

Stop handwaving so much and acting like it's unknowable. It's perfectly knowable just less so when you've got your head buried in the sand, DonkeyCigars.

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Captainant said:

DAE #bothsides?? JFC this plus your other posts in this thread have been whatever the opposite of "illuminating" have been. You're falsely labeling reasoned and rational analysis of the unsustainable economics as "AI doomers" and asserting that "nobody really understands this" when that's only true among your MBA peers. 

There's not a huge groundswell of AI support, there's merely a monopsony in which openAI is (commited to) buying so many of NVDA's chips that it's distorting the market and causing massive inflation in other market segments. Power prices are through the roof, water resources are running dry, and companies like OpenAI, Cursor, Anthropic, et al are missing their profit targets by orders of magnetude. 

Stop handwaving so much and acting like it's unknowable. It's perfectly knowable just less so when you've got your head buried in the sand, DonkeyCigars.

Reasonable minds can disagree because the story is being written as we speak. The absolute and assuredness some people (AI doomers is the term I've used because that is the actual term being used out in society where people touch grass between meetings, not just a word I'm making up to disparage you fine folks here like Brisket), is what I'm pushing back on. I'm not trying to "both sides" this as if it's some moral political argument.

And I do think that despite what you think you know and what your lived experience is, which I'm sure is considerable and meaningful, you are still in the shallow ends of all this stuff just like the rest of us who have our own professional and personal experiences. Nobody knows with any certainity how this is going to play out but my personal opinion is that a good guess is to draw on history which suggests that this at a minimum a) there is no stopping the AI revolution at this point no matter how much handwringing and magna cartas are written by influential people  b) there will be technological progress c) wealth creation for the some d) interesting fundamental changes in everyone's personal and professional lives and e) we will adapt and move on without unaliving ourselves as a people group. 

There are real challenges and concerns as you mentioned with power generation, natural resources, costs, and yes bubbles, but the tracks are being laid for the next 100 years IMO.

And I've said it before but I think there are literal trillion dollar companies of the next 10 years who are not even incorporated yet today who will take advantage of the opportunities.

Edited by Vegas64
Posted
45 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Of course I don't, nobody really does! That's also kind of the fun of living through such a disruption, it's such a fast moving and dynamic landscape we are living through that what you thought you knew yesterday could be wrong 6 months from now, and there is so much opportunity. Maybe I'm just a glass half full kind of guy as a predisposition though.

I mean you really don't know shit about fuck.

There are posters that work in the factory where the AI sausage is being made and have informed opinions on how AI is not being implemented in a measured way.

You just keep defaulting to the "you're a luddite" accusation without providing any insight. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...