multiple kids have been “a frat boy” for their Halloween costume.
B💣b ❤️🔥📿🇺🇸🪆🍀🥋_🎰
@smithy@shitposter.world
philosophy, econ, policy stuff, 7’8” a "poor hole-dwelling devil" AMA: http://curiouscat.me/Smithums OR http://ngl.link/bobbyboiposting
Posts
Latest notes
No posts yet.
one thing that AI is undeniably great for, for now at least, is quickly navigating through administrative/clerical/bureaucratic nonsense -- thing is, I think these systems work on the basis of being somewhat obnoxious to work through & many will (perhaps necessarily in certain cases) find new ways to reestablish hurdles
@p @Nimbius666 I'd say eschew the Marx of (most) self-proclaimed Marxists, but don't throw the baby out w/the bath water - good pieces to scavenge
Perfectly reasonable to think AI is transformative (ranging from the apocalyptic to utopian) but to question whether the American approach to monetizing AI is sustainable/feasible.
@apropos It is surely driving innovation -- and yeah, if there is a calamitous pop, it can definitely work as an upward wealth transfer -- but I am not sure it is going to lead to world where American firms (or maybe even open Western firms) will be in the best position to competitively capitalize on it
A lot of the biggest AI-lovers and haters converge on dismissing any argument that it is anything but another tool -- the former to justify getting their unlimited supply & use of their toys, and the latter to deny there's anything special about it & downplay the risks of it "stealing" human work or creative endeavors, etc.
shallots > onions.
@sun indeed is irksome — I’m more worried about the “passivification” of ppl than the existential risks
What in the hell
People can know their addiction is killing them, truly “know”, and nonetheless continue chasing it. People can acquiesce to the demands of those they know will kill them without resistance. People can see their grave, know it as such, & calmly walk in it.
Two interesting 180s afoot:
-Many ppl who hated AI & dismissed it as trivial/a scam/gimmick/etc. now sounding alarm bells
-Hardcore AI enthusiasts who praised its transformative capacity now dismissing the idea that it's powerful/transformative enough to be dangerous
-Many ppl who hated AI & dismissed it as trivial/a scam/gimmick/etc. now sounding alarm bells
-Hardcore AI enthusiasts who praised its transformative capacity now dismissing the idea that it's powerful/transformative enough to be dangerous
@sun Hell yeah, dawg. That's awesome -- out of curiosity, though you're much healthier on the whole, have you picked up particular bad habits living there?
e.g. I have only stayed in Japan for work and conferences, so it's not reflective of day-to-day life, but I feel like work & social culture there led to me upping my drinking a lot
e.g. I have only stayed in Japan for work and conferences, so it's not reflective of day-to-day life, but I feel like work & social culture there led to me upping my drinking a lot
interesting move by Meta w/Muse -- when you haven't used it for an extended period of time they have it proactively scan for things it can do for you (based on past requests or work, etc.) and it sends you a notification asking if you want it to take action for you. Clever way to get ppl used to incorporating it into their daily routine/workflow.
@sun @parker @meowski effective markdown files beyond the agents/claude.md is such a game changer. Also, effective subagent deployment with the right harnessing is huge too. At the point where I get these bastards to do most of what I need them to, it's all about token economization now -- which is an ongoing game
@sun Trying to think of other similar topics where there's nigh complete consensus among the billionaires/mega rich -- closest is maybe being pro-high-skill immigration (e.g. H-1B, talent visas, etc.). Even when it comes to stuff like wealth taxes, high estate taxes, capital-gains, carried-interest changes, etc. that hit them more directly, there is some divergence.
@sun Definitely makes sense -- especially given that maintaining a moat for the big frontier labs seems so difficult and freakishly costly (and we're seeing that in how close open source models can get with fractions of the cost), but I don't think the right response to potentially regulatory capture is to take the opposite PR approach to hand-wave away concerns as some ppl seem to be doing.
See so many arguments formulated this way that aim to assuage concern by reducing what's appears to be a difference in kind/essence to one that's merely different in degree/sophistication -- don't think it really works even if true.
@sun Yes, this is true -- I think in my experience, using AI to develop things feels very similar to the kinda dopamine rush I'd get from social media or video games -- something about accomplishing things faster, often on a bigger scale or even several projects at once, scratches some itch. Might die down with exposure too. I don't know! Just doesn't feel like computer work used to (as of now, at least)
an under-addressed danger of AI for those who, eagerly or begrudgingly, embrace its use: the amplification of the grindset mindset that’s hard to turn-off. Can make enjoying others or leisure hard
A sloppy but common form of “revealed-preferences” critique that disregards context entirely. You see this with other things too:
e.g. “if you really thought abortion was murder, you would take action immediately to stop it.”
What people are doing in this kind of critique is claiming that if you truly believe X is a form of Y, you would act exactly as one would when it comes to instances that fall under the conventional common understanding of Y -- i.e. that understanding where you would (presumably) be endorsed by the public, are conditioned to respond to the particular act in a certain way, and others/institutions are built around facilitating such a response, etc.
Accordingly, there's a myriad of instances where societies that have injunctions against some (overlapping) understanding of murder have engaged in it on a collective scale, and where even people who disagree with it & see said-actions as murder, didn’t take the commensurate action one would expect according to this critique.
e.g. “if you really thought abortion was murder, you would take action immediately to stop it.”
What people are doing in this kind of critique is claiming that if you truly believe X is a form of Y, you would act exactly as one would when it comes to instances that fall under the conventional common understanding of Y -- i.e. that understanding where you would (presumably) be endorsed by the public, are conditioned to respond to the particular act in a certain way, and others/institutions are built around facilitating such a response, etc.
Accordingly, there's a myriad of instances where societies that have injunctions against some (overlapping) understanding of murder have engaged in it on a collective scale, and where even people who disagree with it & see said-actions as murder, didn’t take the commensurate action one would expect according to this critique.