int_19h

6 ms·

1.
by int_19h 3d ago
You can have abstract trust in democracy over autocracy, but this is not an abstract question - these are the actual choices. Does it really matter if the person who will use AI to fuck us has a "democratic mandate" to do so? We
2.
by int_19h 3d ago
I have something like that running locally for my agentic harness (which includes cross-model messaging). There's a dedicated "product manager" session for it, and all other PMs are instructed to report issues with the harnes
3.
by int_19h 3d ago
I strongly disagree. I'm working on a semantic model for Lojban, heavily AI assisted, using multiple models. I have basically all popular frontier models doing research and panel debates. Astra and Fable are both noticeably ahead of ev
4.
by int_19h 3d ago
I don't think you can ever make a case for it on cost savings in general. Inference is very obviously the kind of problem where things are cheaper at scale, and this is still true for smaller models. The only reason to run locally is p
5.
by int_19h 3d ago
The difference is still vast, it's just that the smaller stuff is "good enough" for many things now.
6.
by int_19h 3d ago
This is very misleading. There is no Chinese model currently that is on par with Fable or Astra. Kimi K3 is pretty good, but it's not that good. Furthermore the Chinese models in that class are appropriately large. K3, for example, is
7.
by int_19h 3d ago
On chemical weapons, most large state actors have got rid of them. Not because of any moral reasons, though, but simply because they don't actually work all that well in modern conventional warfare. This is then framed as an ethical
8.
by int_19h 3d ago
Honestly? I'd rather al Qaeda have access to something like Fable, than the US government. The US government has capacity to do immensely more damage.
9.
by int_19h 3d ago
Anthropic specifically is basically saying that they believe it's even more dangerous if someone else gets to AGI before they do, so they have to either stop everyone or not stop themselves. I personally disagree with that take - a
10.
by int_19h 3d ago
> the rent-seeking parties How do you think billionaires become billionaires?
11.
by int_19h 3d ago
Given the scale of the buildout, I think it would be sensible to mandate that, for every data center built, the companies doing that must also subsidize a new green power plant somewhere (not necessarily the same region, but where it makes
12.
by int_19h 3d ago
> People show up and make decisions. They should then be able to leave and assume those decisions will be put into action. But this isn't the case. In every representative democracy around the world, including ours, the bedrock prin
13.
by int_19h 3d ago
OP specifically said "we don't need to solve hunger and poverty and work balance, and etc, by a round-about make-super-intelligent-AI" though. And I don't know how you get robot farms without that.
14.
by int_19h 3d ago
Of course it is, because our society is pretty much structured to place sociopaths on top. Why is it at all surprising that any technological advancement is going to be used by them in a way that doesn't benefit the rest of us? But i
15.
by int_19h 3d ago
You can still pursue understanding of things, full automation doesn't preclude that. What it does is make it a choice rather than a survival necessity. The latter is where the "suffering" comes from.
16.
by int_19h 3d ago
We still are automating the process, it's just that the automated part of the process covers much of what we regularly do.
17.
by int_19h 4d ago
> Sure, the next step is complete regression to feudalism, but they aren't thinking that far ahead, They are though! They are literally building castles for themselves already.
18.
by int_19h 4d ago
ju'i .atencon. ju'i ro tcurista .e ro naltekno lukpipyprenu .i le kompymacni na se pilno fi lo nu selfingypoksi kei .e lo nu mijgrabi .i va'onai frili fa lo nu cnapygau le spinyverka kei .e lo nu blovyfuzli kei .e lo nu popko
19.
by int_19h 4d ago
Of course they don't, but if you choose to use a work of fiction as an illustration, it comes as a coherent package (assuming the author did a good job at worldbuilding) - you can't just take the bits you like and ignore the bits
20.
by int_19h 4d ago
During the Butlerian Jihad, the people involved in it didn't know that ten thousand years of slavery would be what they are choosing, so we don't know how bad it actually was. The way Jihad presented in the oblique references in b
21.
by int_19h 4d ago
I did; the above is my conclusion. AI itself is a highly positive technological development in terms of how much human suffering it can alleviate.
22.
by int_19h 4d ago
> can't believe there is a class of software engineers who wake up everyday and tell themselves, "today is the day I am going to automate the rest of my job". The whole point of software engineering is automating processe
23.
by int_19h 4d ago
People do exactly that with every vandalized Flock camera. It sucks that our democracy is really mostly just for show and thus such measures are required, but yes, we absolutely can decide such things if we really want to.
24.
by int_19h 4d ago
https://codex-resets.com
25.
by int_19h 4d ago
Progress is fundamentally limited not by finances (which are a human abstraction) but by the energy budget and how much can be extracted from it. This has always been the case, really, although it's unusually blunt in case of AI since
26.
by int_19h 4d ago
> that means that eventually a majority of professions and knowledge work is solved. This is hugely problematic because of the way our society currently functions. Our society has functioned very differently in the past, precisely becau
27.
by int_19h 4d ago
If that was all there is to it, there wouldn't be a problem - the results don't have utility by themselves so they can just be ignored. So, why can't they just be ignored?
28.
by int_19h 4d ago
This only makes sense if you assume that the value of humans to other humans is solely their economic output. Which is certainly how our society is structured, but, does it have to be? Can we admit that we basically have a developmental tra
29.
by int_19h 4d ago
> Then what's the point of thinking by oneself? It's fun. > Of talking to one another? It's fun. > What's the point of being human if we dont do human things but entirely rely on AI? It's fun. Well, it&#x27
30.
by int_19h 4d ago
> If the magnitude of changes that OpenAI and Athropic believe will be delivered with increasingly powerful AI (and robotics) comes in a time frame that significantly worsens a large proportion of people's lives, this is a different

More ›