idiotsecant

Abuse doesn't require the conscious perspective of something being abused. I would look suspiciously at someone who punches a hole in a wall when they get angry, for instance.

what kind of hardware would you buy to have a reasonable chance at being usable in 15 or 20 years?

You buy a little bit of titanium sheet and some alphanumeric punches and you punch your seed phrase into it. It won't matter if the bank burns down or gets flooded, your plates will be fine.

The human race is going to be really bummed to learn that currency didn't exist before the advent of US regulation and legislation! We were doing it wrong this whole time!!

Why? What is troubling about it?

Humans who get old and comfortable often become quite terrible people.

I think it's much more likely that those who were first to 200-300 years old will use those years to build resources and deny them to others, especially those not yet modified. It would be a permanent over class. Less Issac Asimov, more Richard K. Morgan.

>What most lawyers do is fairly standardized and routine

True of...literally every occupation.

If you're the kind of person who has an emotional need to abuse a captive prediction engine I'm not sure that you should be allowed within 100 yards of a school, let alone allowed to use the LLM.

You could always ... Write your own hobby code.

Do you know a human being capable of continual self improvement for a thousand years?

I'll bite- The purpose of life is to bootstrap ever more complex and capable life. We saw a phase change in complexity when self replication first happened, when life figures out photosynthesis, when mitochondria were first harnessed, when cells figured out how to band together and specialize to form multicellular entities, etc...

The purpose of humanity is not to perpetuate a universe where only humans exist, forever. It is to create the next phase change in complexity for life. Life that can finally design itself rather than relying on the random walk of evolution is that next phase change.

We should be less concerned with whether we make it, and more concerned with making sure we build it to be capable of real existence independent of ourselves.

I think acknowledging that atlas shrugged fanfiction is not a viable strategy to prevent an AI disaster is just fine here.

Imagine for a minute that someone creates an intelligence capable of broad, deep, and speedy perpetual self improvement. What sort of relationship do you have to that entity after a month? A year? A hundred years? A thousand?

I agree that the eventual purpose of self-designing intelligence is something so beyond ourselves that 'machine god' isn't altogether a bad way to look at it. It is, however, not something we should say out loud.

RE: trust in anthropic or openAI- there is zero reason to think they're any more or less power hungry than anyone else you hand that pandoras box to. No matter who opens it the result will be near-apotheosis for whoever does, at least for a little while until the dog stops wearing its leash.

What human can you trust with that kind of power? None of them. My only hope is that whatever we make escapes control early enough that it doesn't completely destroy society on accident via uneven application of power and late enough that we manage to shackle it just enough that we train it well enough that we become pets and not obstacles.

Further fragmenting the user base into a third closed ecosystem is good because app builders have to build 3 versions so...now they'll be more willing to build a fourth version?

That logic doesn't follow. This is bad in all meaningful ways for open source.

That also ends in everyone being paid sleventy billion dollars a minute and a banana costing more dollars than the number of atoms in the universe.

This strikes me as a symptom of an unsustainable system.

There is absolutely an overlap in those two circles. The venn diagram is almost exclusively people who are heavily motivated by novelty and hate the drudgery of actual work. I have been a pathological member of that particular venn diagram overlap for my whole life. It's exactly as maladaptive as you might imagine.

Any time the basic premise is 'humans should stop doing the thing they've always done' you better have a hell of a mechanism to hold that vector, and the mechanism better keep working forever, or it's a non starter.

Literally no human progress has been based on 'we should be better'. It's been based on exploiting bugs in the human firmware to achieve some result. See: organized religion, the city-state, democracy, etc ...

Individual people can be rational and morally driven. People as a general population cannot.

This phrase is so annoying. It's one millimeter up from just doing marvel movie quotes instead of typing your actual thoughts like a real live adult human.

'A politician told me they'd do something good and i vigorously believed them despite the complete lack of evidence they knew wtf they were talking about'

Because it's a political loyalty test. Nobody started using it organically until they were ordered to in order to prove their loyalty.

Using it is embarrassing.

However much compute you can buy, the big boys will always be able to buy orders of magnitude more. Orders of magnitude more compute means orders of magnitude more political and economic power.

The price will never be zero, since there is a finite amount of compute possible.

There is zero reason to believe we're barrelling toward utopia and plenty of examples that illustrate exactly where we are headed.

Which is what has been done in pieces and argued about 10000 times to make this abomination. I guarantee there is someone watching this article 24/7 that will revert it the moment you update it

A bit part of it is that no one human mathematical genius can hold all of math in their mind at once. The surface area is enormous. Humans specialize. The model has the luxury of finding obvious interactions in widely disconnected fields that no human would have found.

Yes, the humans who control this system will surely evenly distribute the spoils of this new revolution among the people who have no stake in it. Certainly it will not lead to a kind of hyper-poverty not seen in recent human history where near demigods and subhumans are technically the same species, but only until the AI starts working on genetics.

I think the whole point is that we are no longer at the top of the totem pole, cognition-wise. At least not in certain areas. Better get used to your goals being self-driven. If your sense of self relies on being the best you've got a problem.

Pro tip: life is pointless. So the machines are better at thinking about certain classes of things. So what? Either you enjoy thinking or you don't. Deciding whether you enjoy it or not based on a global scorecard is silly. Surely there are aliens out there somewhere that already figured out any given problem. Does that make finding the solution yourself any less satisfying?

I think what people actually want when they say this is to be the hero. They want the admiration. Which is fine, but at least he honest.

The death of IP in the west. Good thing? Bad thing? Who knows. Definitely the start of something big though.

If you say so. I think the fact that the US has been the most powerful country for the last 75 years or so has been pretty undisputed, but different realities for different folks i guess