vouwfietsman

I am talking about the article, which is applying LLMs and Jev to make those existing toxic patterns more effective and efficient.

Yes and fission reactions can be used both for energy & destruction, but that doesn't mean that the applications of working in defense or powerplants are morally equal.

Everyone is discussing the tech, but you do realize that they made mapping data to real people easier using AI? This is essentially AI-assisted privacy violation, 4 times cheaper.

People, please try to understand what you are building. Don't just build it as asked!

Shoutout to ConfigCat, https://configcat.com/

Same features as all these big guys, EU hosted, and down-to-earth pricing. Even the free tier got me quite far.

I'm unaffiliated btw.

Haha, indeed all of the preparations are surprisingly short-sighted. Nevertheless it shows the thought process behind many of the so-called 'leaders'.

Sadly true, even to the point of paying for not only the pilot to fly their helicopter to the island in the inevitable collapse, but also the pilot's family. Not as a token of generosity of course, no, because otherwise the pilot wouldn't fly them.

The point OP is making is that it is not, in fact that its the opposite: its a magical valuation that almost guarantees you lose money.

Also rare for an IPO, I assume.

I'm glad that geopolitics can be anthropomorphized, so we don't waste brainpower trying to see the nuance of all of it.

Also, have you watched the news in the last 50 years?

I see you are making a lot of similar comments. I am not sure where you get this perceived 'arrogance', I'm sure some of its there, but I'm similarly sure it can be found for Americans or Chinese. People being people, what's new.

> y'all are supposed to be our moral allies

This all comes across as rather black and white. I don't know why you take this stance. I'm sure you understand that it would be very hard for you to understand Europe as a whole, and judge it, just like it would be hard for me to do this with America.

Regardless, when talking morals, I'm also sure you agree there are numerous examples where America has not held up its end of the moral utopian future of prosperity and world peace.

Depends. If you are middle class in US with little savings, moving to Europe will probably make your life worse as relative wages are lower for many professions (e.g software eng).

If you are middle class in EU and have little savings, moving to US will do the opposite and you would be better off.

Your comparison holds for the inverse: getting most of your quality of life from static wealth.

That's nice but none of that is what I said.

Do you change your worldview daily, on the level of opting in or out of religions? Do you think most people do? Do you think we can expect them to?

Not really, that's not how worldviews work. On top of that, religions and cults are very good at embedding themselves into your social/family life marrying leaving the religion with leaving or estranging a large part of social life.

At this point, it is indeed still a choice, but hardly a daily or conscious choice.

Renouncing/converting exists but is rare, life changing, and sometimes dangerous.

Only a tourist would call Helmond and Zwolle closeby, that's like half the Netherlands!

Although I support the idea that Rutte likely possesses a brain, I don't think he's a sensible example as an 'outside view' that tolerates Trump.

Put differently, I don't think a NATO can exist where the Sec. Gen. disagrees fundamentally with Trump. If that were to happen, NATO would simply cease to exist.

This is why its a bad example.

Rutte being NATO Secretary General says more about that position than it does about Rutte. He is a serial liar, lacks any conviction or personal moral compass, and sees politics mostly as a professional career meta-game detached from society.

I think there's a couple things going on:

1. the metrics you mention are hard to measure and usually lag 2. the metrics might not be moving yet, because AI accelerates everything a little bit, and most of the hype is still the promise rather than the actuality 3. people are using the gained productivity to speed up secondary tasks / do different work, because applying it to their main work is still complex or not of sufficient quality

No idea how effective this is, but it sure looks a lot more like engineering than most of the 'prompt engineering' things I've seen in the past years. Kudos to the author for writing this concisely without aggrandizing his work.

your loss

Perfectly describes Australia, indeed. Note how I'm not saying that taxes should be higher and should be "squandered on bureaucracy and monetary black holes", so I'm not sure if I really am one of those.

The world is not black and white, contrary to popular belief.

> The record for highest number of bureaucrats per capita in the world is owned by Australia

You have been convinced by fake news, please recheck this claim, its false.

> wealthy people

*rich people

> All they know how to do is tax people

Oh god you're one of those. People who complain about taxes have historically been on the wrong side of arguments.

These are the same thing. Youth has been able to effortlessly do math by using calculators in the past decades, yet we expect and succeed in them learning math. The main thing we need to do is ban llm use somehow for education, as we have with calculators. Then, piecemeal, bring it back when it makes sense.

True, I hate windows like most people. I just also hate being unrealistic about it. Good thing about AI is you no longer really have to care about really understanding the OS, unless you are an admin.

No I'm arguing that many developments that simplify work while not undermining understanding exist, and we have dealt with them. In the narrow scope of understanding engineering, the fact that AI can also engineer does not prevent us from proper education or gaining understanding.

Indeed it is, so it would be bad to just "resist ai"

You are providing nuance to the authors stance, my reaction is to the authors stance. I don't disagree with you but this is no longer about the actual content of the blog post.

> but having no ability to work in a world with worsening quality of life

If unemployment leads to death, there are many more things wrong than just AI. Why get mad at AI instead of at capitalism. This is nonsensical.

> Tobacco/Soda Industry Playbook

Except both of those succeeded in destroying health for decades, whereas AI had like a 2 year run before all the datacenter madness came to light.

> My current stance is not undoing things to zero,

This does not at all answer my question, my question is about the past not the present. The author is arguing to resist AI, what if resisting cars had worked? This is my question.

Depends on what you mean by correct. Do you think the world would be better if those anti-technology people succeeded and the technologies did not come to be?

A world without steam engines, cars, computers, printing presses.

> For example, for every React app whistled up in five hours, there's a high schooler or college student out there sleepwalking through their foundational courses and being set up to catastrophically fail upon trying to enter the job market.

Oh man how did we ever survive calculators.

No, what he says is not right. Parts of it are, but broadly (as I pointed out) he conflates a lot of things together that have no business being in the same sentence.

1. Reducing/replacing/automating highly complex work is fundamentally a good thing, it might be the case that society is not ready for the consequences of it, those are two separate things. Concluding that millions of people will die, is simply hyperbole.

2. Saying that AI is not intelligent is at best a non-sequitur but more likely intended misrepresentation and goalpost moving

3. The environmental harm of AI, however significant, is ultimately public knowledge and 100% clear in the public discourse around the current implementation of AI. This says nothing about AI in the general sense, only how we produce it today. This is like preventing cars from becoming a thing because they produce CO2. Do you think the world would be better off if cars were never invented?

None of this is about the 'artistic properties of their words', it is precisely about the core content being objectionable.

Bad blog.

> I do not come to you with clean hands. > I am not here to dictate morality

These two things contradict eachother.

> My primary focus here will be software development > Environmental Harm > Stanley Tucci

These three things also contradict eachother.

> If we lived in a post-scarcity

Maybe this is your real problem, and you're just confusing cause and effect.

> We need to resist “AI” so that thousands, perhaps millions of people do not die

Hyperbole.

> Look up the “Eliza effect”. Even the weakest conceivable program like this was seductive. These new ones are masters of seduction.

Sounds like software development alright.

This person has a familiar name, I'm sure he is amazing at something. This blog is not the peak of his work.

EDIT:

> I quote “AI” to emphasize that these things are not intelligent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect