"It's owned by people and controlled by people" That is exactly why people need to be afraid. Scared into action. That is exactly why it can not save humanity.

The question largely depends on what an AI defines as "truth", "love", and "well-being".

@simonesewero9405

Ай бұрын

AI can’t argue with Plato without using AI 😂

Okay, Just going with the term AI which is a misnomer. AI can be useful in some endeavors. Mostly as a knowledge machine. Presenting searchable facts, performing programmable ( a set series of steps to achieve a result) tasks, at a higher rate of speed that what's available. They are already creating military drones that can navigate, decide who to kill, and then execute the target it decided on.

Who seeks to rule? Other than the occasional person or group that rise up out of oppression, the authoritative, the controllers, the narcissist. Those that declared themselves greater than others. Those that believe they are the greater good that everyone else should be sacrificed for. That's who will seek, and succeed, to control AI.

Imagine, for a second, generative AI becoming a baseline depency like the internet has become for every aspect of life. For children to have grown up on average not knowing what a file system is but thinking themselves writers and artists and programers by asking the most menial prompt to the bot. The adoption rate of this tech by the rest of the organism of society scares me more than the actual progress of the tech itself. It seems like the ultimate separation of the individual and the material reality which underlies all, of the spark of critical and revolutionary thought, leading to the disgetics of creativity. Being autotelic, to take your time doing lifelong projects, or understand reality through philosophy, to spend a decade getting better at a craft... it seems that even to attempt those you are already loosing and being cast aside because of what our society values above all: production. Linked to the path of least resistance and ease of acess. Every person will be generators and consumers of functionally infinite saturation. Technological revolution without social revolution will only exacerbate the vices of the system which came before it. Even if someone were to use generative AI the "RIGHT" way, as in, for learning the right amount of things and knowing what the AI cant tell them and look elsewhere, how would those individuals stand out amidst endless sludge and noise in this digital litering we all will be forced to partake in? Now more than ever is Silicon Valley thinking they can come up with solutions in a vacuum which they pretend to live in. That their field, extremely narrow and specialized, will be the one able to dictate the vast hollistic problem of the whole of the organism. It wont. They use AGI as an alibi so they can offset your worries to the indefinite future, as well as getting investors' attention, as if they haven't already opened Pandora's box. The world as it is will collapse much faster than the coming of an hypothetical computer god. We don't need more tech, we need the right tech, in the right amount. If regulation is the way to filter out the chaos, then the best AI will be the one which can filter out the imense wave of generated content to distinguish what was made with AI and what wasn't. And it being mandated by the law to be used by any enterprise. It's one of the few things I can come up with which would preserve a modicum of reality.

@Jareers-ef8hp

8 ай бұрын

This is by far the best comment in this comment section, and I couldn’t agree more. What is the end goal of all this tech? Is our fate to have our every whim be catered to without needing to even think? Are we to just devolve into gelatinous blobs of biomass due to our comfortability? What will be left of humanity then? Eternal pleasure without any sort of worldly struggle is pure hell to me, a fate worst than death if you will.

@BinaryDood

8 ай бұрын

@@Jareers-ef8hpWe already know the answer. Look at C2PA and Sam Altman's crypto currency dictated by the scanning of your iris for authenticity so it "could fund UBI". This won't go through now, when the iron is hot, but it is so obvious that they are forcing our mass consent to adopt a solution they concocted for a problem they have created. Their motivations are pretty clear, though the cunning of reason does not allow me to be specific about any outcome. Too many moving parts going too fast seem to indicate we are not gonna form a synthethis without a lot of chaos first. But that synthesis seems to lead to a post-labor economics where we are driven to be a merely consumant species en mass. In time that letargy making us the guinea pigs of Silicon Valley and the like. Living statistics, the particles of society to be meddled, optiomized, react, etc. There will still need be labor which AI cannot do. The good ending would be a return to real scenario: if society could organize its workers to work 4 hour days 4 days a week because the essential work that needs to be done, divided by people who need work, with smartly integrated shifts, should make this easily possible. It is an absolute shift, sure, but the AI disruption will be a massive shift regardless. It's up to class consciousness and our reaction trickling up to institutions capable of change to wether we will live in some sort of guinea pig "welfare"=UBI, techno feudalism, or be able to be one with the material world and have production of essential goods and services which AI cannot immediately take away (and hence always in our side having that labour as a bargain) on our side and not become merely passive. Because things wont be perfect. You won't live in the Wall-E infantilized world, you will likely die alongside the trash and rubble left behind. Those chubby neo-humans are likely the sons of the sons of a wealthy class who got to reap the benefits in clean hands of blissful ignorance. After all, we will likely be entering Post-History in our lifetimes (should nothing change). Not in Fukuyama's or Kocheve's perspective, I mean it functionally. History is divided from per-history when we find written records, or something indicating the recording of information. It makes sense that the line separating history from post-history being when there is so much information regardless of meaning that it becomes impossible to distinguish signal from noise. Hence no true records to read where reality can be derived. Kinda like that Jorge Luis Borges story with the Library containing all books the could ever be written, but you pick up any book and its a meaningless assortment of letters and spacing. Because of course it is, and that is 99.99999% of the library. Where you to write a book solving all the universe's problems, you couldn't place it one the shelf, because it was full of nothing, noise, sludge, meaningless stuff. Reminds me when I used to play MMOs and the servers where always crowded, and after hours of trying to log in, I finally did, and 99% of players were bots. All in the same X and Y preprogramed coordinates. A game full of non-players, so that people who wan't to play could not, due to external motivators outside the activity itself. This is out future I feel. We create infinity but our attention is finite, it's tied to the material (like the servers of the game were), yet we will be forced to ignore the one true self-renewing 10 wats consuming imaginative machine that exists, in trade of resource guzzling narrow producers of multifaceted sludge. Creativity outsourced, with imagination to follow, our minds will grow as tame as a child's toungue which never learned to tast anything other than sweet. This why I opposed "Content made specifically for you is always better". Not only it severs your connection to others and the world, but you essentially will put yourself in worldviews so narrow you might as well think the world is just shadows in the wall. rant over I guess

@BinaryDood

8 ай бұрын

well im not fixing all that grammar and punctionation

@MisterMunkki

4 ай бұрын

I'm reminded of Socrates and the myth of Thoth... There's very little chance that AI will make humans infinitely intelligent, and a great chance that it'll make them infinitely stupid without it

@BinaryDood

4 ай бұрын

@@MisterMunkki we are never trully allowed to use new technology. Every new technology revolution comes with its invisible social contract that you agree to not be able to live without it, and that whatever surplus it creates you may never come to enjoy it so you can never have free time. "The other sciences seek to understand reality, Big Tech seeks to replace it"

"The machine version of infinite love." So machines love?

Michael, what do you think about this guy Anthony Levandowski who has an AI church called Way of the Future? It’d be interesting to hear your philosopher’s take on religious cults focused on these aspirational utopian futures that are likely to exploded with AI in the coming years.

Hi Michael. Reading this paper as a statement of what is real is in big error. From the beginning at 00:59 a huge error states that "AI is a computer program like any other. It runs(has energy), takes input (interacts with it's environment), processes (analizes data), and generates output (communicates a conclusion). This definition strips the right for independent thought from everything, and classifies all thought as computers. Please critique the writing instead of pushing it as fact.

@millerman

8 ай бұрын

I'm sure there is much more to say about it than I said. My goal was to read it for people who missed it and to comment on some things (not everything) along the way. I encourage you to write your own critique/response! Thanks for the comment in any case.

@caseyczarnomski8054

8 ай бұрын

@@millerman excellent suggestion, I'll add it to the list of topics I want to discuss on my channel.

I’m thinking about what is the counter to AI in warfare? It amazes me the rudimentary techniques that less advanced insurgents or militaries use to counter our “Lamborghini” military. For instance, you can dig a hole and put a bomb in it that can be detonated by a cell phone…cheap. The way the US military countered it was with the DUKE systems which are insanely expensive. A quick Google check looks like the program cost around $6 billion. The average cost of an IED is $265. This is what is intriguing to me. There is almost always a way to counter these incredible advances in technology with something extremely simple. Another example would be Hamas shooting rockets made with pieces of piping and explosives and the Israeli “Iron Dome” has to defend against them. The Iron Dome systems cost $50 million per battery and $150,000 per interception. How much do these DIY pipe rockets cost to make the Hamas militants? $300? Who knows. These are just a few examples of very simple tactics bleeding highly technological systems. It will be very interesting to see the AI revolution in military affairs looks like.

Wasn’t this article covered before? I remember the sentence on how AI “will have infinite compassion etc.” from a previous video.

@millerman

8 ай бұрын

Yes but I pulled it down as soon as someone pointed out that there was a loud buzz throughout the video. The other day, someone asked me to put it back up. So I edited the audio to remove most of the noise. But KZread doesn't allow me to replace the video file on an existing video. I had to do a rerelease like this. Apologies for the repetition but it was the only way I could do it (as far as I know) with the improved audio.

@millerman

8 ай бұрын

In short, yes this is the same old livestream but with improved audio and the only way I could put it out was as a new video (I would have preferred to swap the new video in to the old link). Sorry about that.

good people make good AI, bad people make bad AI; so here we are, back to the Principal Nicomachean Ethics...

One of the key aspects of AI when it comes to liability is that since we need humans to be liable for any accidents or malicious usage, that in itself will ensure that humans are tethered to AI at every stage. It’s kind of the insurance requirements, much like how if a self driving car crashes who is at fault? Well, whoever owns the car is, because people can’t see computers. So even though Andreesen wants the regulators out of AI - as I do - it seems impossible to untangle that web given the existing risk mitigations that are mandatory across every sector of society today. Perhaps countries that lean more libertarian, such as El Salvador with Nayib Bukele and now, maybe, Argentina with Javier Milei, could provide spaces for rogue-ish AI companies to do the “dangerous” things that US-based companies will be prevented from even exploring legally.

Hey Michael, how much of AI development is similar to Jewish Kabbalistic magic of creating a Golem? i.e. creating living beings out of inert material etc (thus playing God)

They needed something less complicated than people, so they pet? Now they want even less complicated than pets? we keep confusing storage with memory, aren't we!

No audio

@millerman

8 ай бұрын

See my reply to the other comment about that

Im not getting sound with this video

@millerman

8 ай бұрын

It seems to take a minute when the video is first uploaded for it to process (on KZread's side) -- and when it does so, you'll hear it with the sound. This was never an issue before but it has been for my last few uploads. The good news is it resolves itself quickly. The bad news is that it happens at all.

@frederickburke9944

8 ай бұрын

Yep it is good now. Thanks

No

52:00 This is very annoying and he keeps doing it in this article, sneakily shifting definitions; first he's talking about wealth inequality and the accumulation of capital in the "bourgeoisie", then he uses the literal richest man on earth as an example of the opposite? We're talking about the means of production and he switches to the product, hoping you won't notice. I don't think it would be in Musk's "greedy" interest to make everyone on earth have their very own Tesla factory

Hi Michael, I think AI isn't more intelligent, or add intelligence to people - depending on how we define intelligence - but rather add knowledge to our understanding so that we can make a more intelligent decisions. AI is data driven. The assumption is that the more data we have to make decision, the better, more intelligent, decision we make.

@neolee8206

8 ай бұрын

An irrational view. Utopians always ignore that the evil does exist AND evil is far more likely to seek control than the "live and let live" good guys.

"hunting terrorists"....yikes

I generally agree with Andreesen on AI, and even err on the side of the accelerationists rather than the people begging for government regulation, skeptics and doomsayers.

Andreessen's rant is a jejune wish list, nothing more, and not at all interesting.

Propaganda.

That's good that the author did take into account of the bad actors, who with the knowledge of AI can create an AI generated system that could harm society, like those who create email fraud, ransomware, computer viruses, etc. Yes, AI is owned and controlled by "people", but so is many other things that could be used by "people" to harm others.

@neolee8206

8 ай бұрын

Could be used and are used to destroy.

AGI is still at least decades away. What we have now are just LLM google searches