Just this guy, you know?
Oh please. The anti-TikTok hysteria has been going on much longer than the Israeli invasion of Gaza, and the narrative has largely been about national security concerns, particularly as they relate to election misinformation.
Agree or not with the anti-China rhetoric about TikTok, but at least argue about the facts and not inane conspiracy theories.
My Momentum 4s have 60 hours of battery life…
What?
Compiling quality datasets is enormously challenging and labour intensive. OpenAI absolutely knows the provenance of the data they train on as it’s part of their secret sauce. And there’s no damn way their CTO won’t have a broad strokes understanding of the origins of those datasets.
Take it to an electronics recycling center. Seriously.
If you already have a homelab, you plan to replace it, you don’t want to repair it, and you don’t have an obvious use case for another machine (it’s just another computer; you either have the need for another computer or you don’t), then holding onto it is just hoarding.
deleted by creator
That’s roughly right, but that doesn’t make him in any meaningful way “good”. Of course I also don’t think anyone who decided to drop the bombs on Japan was a “good guy”. But maybe that’s why I’m not a pure utilitarian.
Absolutely not, unless you adhere to pure utilitarianism. Veidt kills untold numbers of innocent people on a self-imposed quest to do what he believes will save humanity. He was a straight up megalomaniac and the only upside is that his murderous actions eventually lead to peace.
If somebody wanted to draw animated kiddie porn they could still do that. How far would you go until you ban crayons
It’s genuinely impressive how completely you missed my point.
How about another analogy: US federal law allows people to own individual firearms, but not grenades.
But they’re both things that kill people, right? Why would they be treated differently?
Hint: it’s about scale.
The same is true of pipe bombs. But anyone can make a pipe bomb. Genie is out of the bottle, right? So why are there laws regulating manufacture and ownership of them? Hmm…
And how many times have you made this comment, only to have it pointed out that there is a big fucking difference between a human manually creating fake images via Photoshop at human speed using human skills, versus automating the process so it can be done en masse at the push of a button?
Because that’s a really big fucking difference.
Think: musket versus gatling gun. Yeah, they both shoot bullets, but that’s about where the similarity ends.
Is the genie out of the bottle at this point? Probably.
But to claim this doesn’t represent a massive shift because Photoshop? Sorry but that’s at best naive, and it’s starting to get exhausting seeing this “argument” trotted out repeatedly by AI apologists.
deleted by creator
If you have an Android phone I can’t recommend Genius Scan enough. Fast, accurate, lots of features. I use it with syncthing by exporting the files to a folder that’s configured to sync the paperless input folder.
Just want to say thank you! Paperless is one of the first things I recommend to anyone considering self hosting their infra. Amazing piece of work!
deleted by creator
Amazing how Google and Apple differ on so much, but in this respect they are in total agreement…
Hah I… think we’re on the same side?
The original comment was justifying unregulated and unmitigated research into AI on the premise that it’s so dangerous that we can’t allow adversaries to have the tech unless we have it too.
My claim is AI is not so existentially risky that holding back its development in our part of the world will somehow put us at risk if an adversarial nation charges ahead.
So no, it’s not harmless, but it’s also not “shit this is basically like nukes” harmful either. It’s just the usual, shitty SV kind of harmful: it will eliminate jobs, increase wealth inequality, destroy the livelihoods of artists, and make the internet a generally worse place to be. And it’s more important for us to mitigate those harms, now, than to worry about some future nation state threat that I don’t believe actually exists.
(It’ll also have lots of positive impact as well, but that’s not what we’re talking about here)
Training new models is already the domain of large actors only, simply due to the GPU requirements, which serve as a massive moat. That ship has sailed. There isn’t a single open source model, today, that wasn’t trained by a corporate entity first, and then only fined tuned by the community later.
You don’t need AI for any of that. Determined state actors have been fabricating information and propagandizing the public, mechanical Turk style, for a long long time now. When you can recruit thousands of people as cheap labour to make shit up online, you don’t need an LLM.
So no, I don’t believe AI represents a new or unique risk at the hands of state actors, and therefore no, I’m not so worried about these technologies landing in the hands of adversaries that I think we should abandon our values or beliefs Just In Case. We’ve had enough of that already, thank you very much.
And that’s ignoring the fact that an adversarial state actor having access to advanced LLMs isn’t somehow negated or offset by us having them, too. There’s no MAD for generative AI.
Really? I’m supposed to believe AI is somehow more existentially risky than, say, chemical or biological weapons, or human cloning and genetic engineering (all of which are banned or heavily regulated in developed nations)? Please.
I understand the AI hype artists have done a masterful job convincing everyone that their tech is so insanely powerful (and thus incredibly valuable to prospective investors) that it’ll wipe out humanity, but let’s try to be realistic.
But you know, let’s take your premise as a given. Even despite that risk, I refuse to let an unknowable hypothetical be used to hold our better natures hostage. The examples are countless of governments and corporations using vague threats as a way to get us to accept bad deals at the barrel of a virtual gun. Sorry, I will not play along.
I don’t. Played with it a bit but as a capable writer and coder I don’t find it fills a need and just shifts the effort from composition (which I enjoy) to editing and review (which I don’t).