adrians1

5 ms·

1.
by adrians1 3mo ago
Oh, sorry. 99% of the time.
2.
by adrians1 3mo ago
We weren't wrong just once, 40 years ago. That's just one example, but the Luddites and doomers were wrong every time something new was invented. Check this out: https://x.com/PessimistsArc
3.
by adrians1 3mo ago
We're not much better than our ancestors. We'd like to think we are, because we're much more intelligent and have access to more information. But we really aren't. We're still driven by irrational sentiments and fea
4.
by adrians1 3mo ago
If you oppose LLMs and the field because of pure irrational instinct, like those people in the past, you can just state it outright, no need for complicated arguments.
5.
by adrians1 3mo ago
Of course. Those people back then were stupid and irrational and couldn't see they were wrong. Today we are much more enlightened and smart, and our convoluted arguments, that sound very smart and somehow reach the same conclusion that
6.
by adrians1 3mo ago
Remember the debate about how nuclear was stopped in the 70s because of NIMBYism? We are now wondering "how could people then be so stupid and shortsighted?". Well, there you go, here's history repeating before our eyes.
7.
by adrians1 3mo ago
> Why Does Everyone Hate AI? Because it was invented after they were 35. "1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works. 2. Anything that's invent
8.
by adrians1 8mo ago
I don't get what I should be angry about here? That Bill Gates wrote something when he was 20? 20 year olds say stupid things all the time. Think about you when you were 20.
9.
by adrians1 8mo ago
Given that, according to the ban proponents own words, social media algorithms are addictive as hell and impossible to resist, what do they think it will happen to those children after 16? Do you really believe that they will magically be &
10.
by adrians1 2y ago
AI researchers are just as prone as everyone else to be self-delusional.
11.
by adrians1 3y ago
This is what people don't appreciate when quoting those statistics about how self-driving cars are safer than humans: when a human driver causes an accident, it was because that particular person did something wrong. When a self-drivin
12.
by adrians1 3y ago
Agree, it's a serious vulnerability, but it's not exploitable remotely.
13.
by adrians1 3y ago
> Remote attacks work by first exploiting an unpatched vulnerability in a browser, media player, or other app and using the administrative control gained to replace the legitimate logo image processed early in the boot process with an id
14.
by adrians1 3y ago
Not true, most AI doomers are actually worried about Skynet.
15.
by adrians1 3y ago
> But in truth, OpenAI was already a capitalist/commercial enterprise and has been for over a year and those concerned had already failed in keeping the beast contained. The cat is out of the bag, and trying to keep ChatGPT in the b
16.
by adrians1 3y ago
> Most of the ai safety arguments revolve around “once it’s powerful enough to cause damage it’ll be too late to come up with a strategy” I don't see any reason to accept this argument. The AI safety people should also prove their a
17.
by adrians1 3y ago
Even if AI is a threat, it's impossible to predict today how the threat is going to look in the future. The "AI safety" crowd watched too many Terminator movies. We'll deal with AI the same way humans dealt with any othe
18.
by adrians1 3y ago
The technology was already developed with Microsoft money and the model was exclusively licensed to Microsoft.
19.
by adrians1 3y ago
> If the speed of improvement stays anywhere near the level it was the last two years, then over the next two decades, it will lead to massive changes in how we work and which skills are valuable. That's a big assumption to make. Yo