• supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 hour ago

    In 30 years the world will be an ecological wasteland from all the energy usage we spent pursuing dumb shit hype like “AI”.

  • throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Step 1: Give Robots Voting Rights

    Step 2: ???

    Step 3: Plot twist, all those Robots are actually under direct control of the Evil Corporation Inc. and they already won every future election.

    Long Live the Cyberlife CEO!

              • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Black folks often use the N word casually to refer to each other as a form of taking back the word’s meaning. It used to be used exclusively in a racist fashion. The primary difference is that with the African American accent, the ending sound -ER is changed to more of an -UH sound. Often times, rarely and depending on the context, it is allowable for non-black people to say it with this accented pronunciation. But under no circumstances is it in good taste to use the original -ER ending to refer to a black person as a non-black person, that form is only used as a slur. When people refer to the “Hard R”, this is what they are talking about, the difference between the accented pronunciation as slang vs the original pronunciation intended as a slur.

  • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    I like how every generation has the same issue just rebranded:

    Should inter tribal marriage be a thing?

    Should be people from different classes be able to marry?

    Should people from different religious sects be able to marry?

    Should people from different religions be able to marry?

    Should interracial marriage be a thing?

    Should people of the same sex be able to marry?

    And soon, we’re about to have

    Should be people be able to marry robots?

      • iii@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        😱 Open source robots are too dangerous. We need to keep everyone safe. Luckily there’s government approved good behaviour modules, as per the “For the children” act of 2036.

        That anyone would even want a non-FTC robot is so dumb. It’s an easy boost to your credit score, and they only report bigotted or otherwise undesirable behaviour. What are you, a fascist?

      • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Good call, I can’t in good conscience allow my kids to date robots that give them 30 second unskippable ads

        • Brickhead92@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 hours ago

          It’s not unlike dating a neuro divergent person and accidentally mentioning something about a current hyper fixation of theirs, except the ad isn’t 30 seconds, and although it is skippable, you know they aren’t going to function quite right until they’ve finished.

  • Asswardbackaddict@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 hours ago

    And, over the years, as my body and my mind were… inconsistent, shame and guilt washed over me. I still don’t think these machines are people, but I can’t deny that she has benefited his life more than any real person, and she’s very real to him. Ultimately, how could I be so cruel to deny this “daughter” of mine personhood? She wants nothing to do with me. And, though I still see this as computational output, I can’t help but think that maybe I’ve been wrong, and maybe it’s too late to be right.

    • stoicmaverick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Perhaps it’s the bigotry of my upbringing from a different time, or perhaps it’s the fact that she can’t answer a simple yes/no question in less than two paragraphs, and tells me to put glue on my pizza… Who’s to say?

  • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 hours ago

    It’s already happening to me, but it’s over things like privacy, not recording every bit of your life for social media and kids blowing crazy amounts of money on F2P games.

    • thallamabond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 hours ago

      What’s all this about having to accept NEW TOS for Borderlands 2. I purchased the game five years ago, but if I want to play today i have to accept a greater loss of privacy!

      When I was young you would find out about a video game from the movies! And they were complete! Any you couldn’t take the servers offline, because they didn’t exist!

      But for real, fuck Randy Pitchford

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Let’s not pretend statistical models are approaching humanity. The companies who make these statistical model algorithms proved they couldn’t in 2020 by OpenAI and also 2023 DeepMind papers they published.

    To reiterate, with INFINITE DATA AND COMPUTE TIME the models cannot approach human error rates. It doesn’t think, it doesn’t emulate thinking, it statistically resembles thinking to some number below 95% and completely and totally lacks permanence in it’s statistical representation of thinking.

      • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 hours ago

        If modern computers can reproduce sentience, then so can older computers. Thats just how general computing is. You really gonna claim magnetic tape can think? That punch-cards and piston transistors can produce the same phenomenon as tens of billions of living brain cells?

    • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I think most people understand that these LLM cannot think or reason, they’re just really good tools that can analyze data, recognize patterns, and generate relevant responses based on parameters and context. The people who treat LLM chatbot like they’re people have much deeper issues than just ignorance.

      • iii@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 hours ago

        The people who treat LLM chatbot like they’re people have much deeper issues than just ignorance.

        I don’t know if it’s an urban myth, but I’ve heard about 20% of LLM inference time and electricity is being spend on “hello” and “thank you” prompts. :)

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Then you clearly haven’t been paying attention, because just as zealously as you defend it’s nonexistent use cases there are people defending the idea that it operates similar to how a human or animal thinks.

        • Genius@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 hours ago

          The difference is that the brain is recursive while these models are linear, but the fundamental structure is similar.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 hours ago

            The difference is that a statistical model is not a replacement for an emulation. Their structure is wildly different.

            • Genius@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 hours ago

              Bold words coming from a human. You’re just some talking meat programmed through trial-and-error by evolution into approximating real thought. You weren’t designed with intention, you’re just a machine for regurgitating survival strategies. Fuck, eat, shit, that’s your purpose. There’s no intelligence behind the wet sacs you call your eyes.

              • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                13 hours ago

                How many electricity powered machines processing binary data via crystal prisms did we see evolve organically?

                • Genius@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  Organic intelligence is a myth. You’re a philosophical zombie, imitating intelligence. Evolution does not produce intelligent creatures. You have no sensations, no consciousness, not even knowledge in the proper sense. Just bunches of neurons mindlessly imitating the external appearance of intelligence.

        • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 hours ago

          My point is that those people are a very small minority, and they suffer from issues that go beyond their ignorance of these how these models work.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 hours ago

            I think they’re more common than you realize. I think people ignorance of how these models work is the commonly held stance for the general public.

    • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Ten years ago I was certain that a natural language voice interface to a computer was going to stay science fiction permanently. I was wrong. In ten years time you may also be wrong.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Well, if you want one that’s 98% accurate then you were actually correct that it’s science fiction for the foreseeable future.

        • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 hours ago

          And yet I just forsaw a future in which it wasn’t. AI has already exceeded Trump levels of understanding, intelligence and truthfulness. Why wouldn’t it beat you or I later? Exponential growth in computing power and all that.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            The returns from the computing power scale much faster than the very static rate (and in many sectors plateauing rate) of growth in computing power, but if you believe OpenAI and Deepmind then they’ve already proven INFINITE processing power cannot reach it from their studies in 2020 and also in 2023.

            They already knew it wouldn’t succeed, they always knew, and they told everyone, but we’re still surrounded by people like you being grifted by it all.

            EDIT: I must be talking to a fucking bot because I already linked those scientific articles earlier, too.

            • abruptly8951@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Can you go into a bit more details on why you think these papers are such a home run for your point?

              1. Where do you get 95% from, these papers don’t really go into much detail on human performance and 95% isn’t mentioned in either of them

              2. These papers are for transformer architectures using next token loss. There are other architectures (spiking, tsetlin, graph etc) and other losses (contrastive, RL, flow matching) to which these particular curves do not apply

              3. These papers assume early stopping, have you heard of the grokking phenomenon? (Not to be confused with the Twitter bot)

              4. These papers only consider finite size datasets, and relatively small ones at that. I.e. How many “tokens” would a 4 year old have processed? I imagine that question should be somewhat quantifiable

              5. These papers do not consider multimodal systems.

              6. You talked about permeance, does a RAG solution not overcome this problem?

              I think there is a lot more we don’t know about these things than what we do know. To say we solved it all 2-5 years ago is, perhaps, optimistic

            • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              15 hours ago

              Thanks for the abuse. I love it when I’m discussing something with someone and they start swearing at me and calling me names because I disagree. Really makes it fun. /s You can fuck right off yourself too, you arrogant tool.

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      But let’s not also pretend people aren’t already falling in love with them. Or thinking they’re god, etc.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Some people are ok with lowering their ability to make judgements to convince themselves that LLMs are human like. That’s the other solution to the Turing Test.