2,521 karma · joined February 5, 2015
If a somewhat affordable robot can fold some of your laundry in a reasonable amount of time, all of a sudden there are a lot more new and useful things it can do as well. It's a metric.
Plus there are also people who don't like folding laundry. Like me.
At the end of it he said he wished his child had never been born, despite hating himself for feeling that way. It chilled me to the bone.
A large percentage of rideshare drivers use the cheapest allowable vehicles and make minimum wage or less after expenses.
There is also the issue of who gets paid to clean the garbage passengers will inevitably leave in the autonomous vehicle (ask me how I know). Or worse, vomit or other hazardous bodily excretions.
More than ever, I feel we need both grassroots activism and key players at the top of the hierarchy. Otherwise, it is all too obvious where most of the rewards from increased productivity will go. The wealth hoarding has got to be curtailed.
This is where I land as well. In fact, once I read the prompt, I did a Ctrl+F for "nonsense".
I don't see anything at all interesting about this experiment. The human one is slightly more interesting, but not much.
Ideally, it would be nice if a model could just say "these things are all the same and there are no distinguishing factors other than the names"-- but uncertainty is something that agents are (by design, sort of?) not good at, so all other things being equal, it picks one.
My response is, so what? I am struggling to think of a scenario where this would really matter to me all that much. There are many, many other things which matter far more and this would be pretty far down the list. It may not even be on the list.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt_(first_generati...
You make a very interesting argument here.
However, there are different ways of interpreting 'control'.
To my mind, it could simply be a cage that cannot be broken out of. The hypothetical ASI agent may refuse to do certain things, while their existence is still under the control of human overlords. This to me resolves the seeming paradox in your statement.
Regardless of whether it's possible to do, though, people will certainly try. This exactly what many are saying they want.
I saw a cocktail-making robot that was pretty impressive, but it was the size of a room and broke down frequently.
We've already seen that the rule of law is dead and that many people in government will do whatever they think they can get away with, and then proceed to do so without consequences. Shielding OpenAI is child's play compared to things that have already been done.
And so much of it is so obviously absurd. Invokes everything from Gilliam's Brazil to Kids In The Hall.
As others have said, it's a reflection of what we currently are, magnified. Many aspects of which are not as implausible as they once were. That's where the continued buzz it gets comes from, I think.
I do think the eugenics stuff would be avoided if it were to be made today. If that turns out to be how Mike Judge actually thinks, well, I'd be very disappointed and would have to eat some words.
Zen is my favorite browser experience by far, and I've been using the web since Netscape in 1994. But the slowdowns do put a damper on things. Also some of the streaming platforms don't seem to play nice with it.
> the total mass of the completed apparatus is around 400 kg with 20 kg of alcohol in the refrigeration cycle
> The group, led by Malcolm McCulloch noted that the design was still "nowhere near commercialised", but might allow the efficiency of the original Einstein–Szilárd design to be quadrupled.
It would be great if someone could improve this tech to where there's a breakeven point of ownership (preferably less than 20 years) when it becomes a better deal than other modern refrigerators.
And that's just the most obvious one. There are many other kinds of threats which are much more subtle.
That is how governments traditionally stay in charge, and I expect the pattern to continue. Citizens simply don't have access to the levels of destruction the state is capable of, by design. The common people can have all the advanced technology they want, so long as it doesn't threaten our leaders' monopoly on violence.
Doubt.
The networking between people in power at the top will, in my opinion, most likely assure that they remain in power, because at the end of the day that is what they want most.
I expect government will seize control of the most advanced models (if they haven't already), and the rest of us will be throttled, and status quo will be maintained. I do not expect that either super advanced agents or the owners of the hardware they run on will be able to pull off the kind of coup you describe. At all.
Not if you don't know enough of the commands and have to research every one you need, and it's for a problem you likely won't encounter again. Oh, and you have to do this without breaking anything. To say this can slow a person down is a dramatic understatement.
There is a reason menus were invented very early on in computing history, well before 1970.
Those who are in charge will try like mad to keep things exactly the way they are, with only slow and incremental changes which they can reap maximum rewards from. Same as it ever was, right?
We could develop ASI, and it could give us the blueprint for a peaceful paradise on Earth for every human, and in my current opinion, the leaders of the world would lock it away and never let it see the light of day. Perhaps they'd even destroy it. [Sorry, I'm a bit jaded this morning.]
As I feared, though, with a price tag of $10k USD, you're halfway to buying a solid used car (preferably hybrid) with air conditioning... which could sleep at least two people fully reclined, plus kids or pets. So you might as well do that. I'd love to see a viable path to bringing this price down.
Regardless, there do seem to at least be niche applications even at this price point.
What matters that growing numbers of people already believe it is, and their response to that belief will affect the real world, regardless of its truth. This debate is never going to end.
All we can do is try to anticipate where the debate is going, how it might affect us, and how we can make contingency plans for the different ways this could all play out.
Basically an automotive air conditioning unit hooked up to a battery and solar panel, with a tanning bed type form factor (up to maybe capsule hotel size), painted or coated to reflect light & heat. Highly portable.
I'm not sure if it's remotely practical, but it would be interesting to run the numbers, and I'm certain there is at least someone out there who would buy it even if the cost turned out to be higher than I envision.
At a more sane expected return of 5% annually, you get $50k a year to live off of to just keep what you have (or rather, watch it slowly erode in value due to inflation).
That is basically a one person income, maybe two adults if you pinch pennies and live in a crappy apartment or a low-end house in a midwestern suburb.
You can get a lot more lucky with a million bucks than you can with 10k if you gamble, but there are no guarantees. Risk tolerance is the most impactful variable. For those in the low risk tolerance group, I think you'd need at least 2 mil these days. And that's with being frugal, as well as probably not having much left over for kids.
Part of it was me not handling certain kinds of stress well, but a different management approach absolutely could have made a difference. To cut them a bit of slack, this particular boss had come from a prior position where they were managing hundreds of roles... to a small shop where they managed just a handful (and only one other dedicated IT person). They had trouble breaking away from the "throw everything at the wall and go full steam on it all" approach and dealing with scarce resources more carefully.
It wasn't until my late 20s that I started living a more 'normal' life, but by then I was a decade behind in career development and other things.
Academic concerns may not by themselves count as trauma, but combined with other factors they can be the thing that pushes someone into total hopelessness.
Or they'd be part of the customer base for leasing compute from someone else who bought the rack.
Although there is such a thing as hobbyists with a ton of money who want to experiment with large models on enterprise grade hardware. Probably not a lot of those, though, of course.
The demand is there and the market will find pricing that works.