>owners of the machine have no need to keep you alive
And what reason do they have for killing everyone else? Where is this abject nonsense even coming from? You can't just assert that the "owners of the machine" are all cartoonishly evil for some unknown reason.
All else being equal, at least Sam Altman et al. aren't constantly making up fantasies about exterminating people.
The gulf between reality and this tech-illiterate grifter continues to widen. I strongly suspect his shtick will fall apart before this year is over. And I hope at least some have been keeping close track of what he's been saying.
My general prediction is that we'll see an immense amount of wealth creation and this will naturally trickle everywhere. This is both a continuation and speeding up of the trend we're seeing right now. I think the unusual outcome would be for us to stray from this path.
>you will have nothing of value to contribute too
So perhaps I can finally rest and solely focus on the stuff that I like. For this to be a problem, we need to imagine a dystopian scenario where our systems (and those who run 'em?) are effectively all-powerful and also cartoonishly selfish for no good reason at all.
Bonus: And we should recognize that kids have responsibilities too. If they do something bad, it's silly trying to throw the blame on whatever the current moral panic is. Video games, D&D, rock/rap music, AI (!), etc.
This is where internet lore and 'YouTuber'-made movies will begin to pass stuff like Star Wars and the DCU in popularity and the mainstream consciousness. Backrooms will gross just as much as the Mandalorian movie and the upcoming Supergirl flop, if not more. Glad to see it. In terms of good will, this point was passed well over a decade ago.
Weird thing to brag about here, assuming it's even true. Furthermore, the "empire cultures" thing is clearly false since most researchers and other professionals in this field speak at least two or three languages. This is a global endeavor, not some pet project of a single language or culture.
And the power of "language models" (or any sort of deep learning, really), does not come from assuming that some specific input-output modality, like English text, is the ultimate foundation of thought. Strong versions of this claim were laid to rest around the time when GPT-2 came out. I'd also go further and argue that many people working on the symbolic AI of yesteryear already understood this as well.
The point is that this is no more relevant, informative, or even accurate than "carbon-based facial expression predictors". Any phenomenon in the Universe can be described by a simple and/or insulting short phrase. In other comments you've also shouted out "autocomplete!" and "Markov chain!", as if these phrases are a knock-down argument.
"Pachinko machine", "avalanche", and "game of mad libs" has also been used:
>Humans learn through their experiences, not just backprop.
Sure, sure. And humans move through the act of walking, not just terrestrial locomotion.
>Token predictors are lesser, they are not alive and will never be alive.
And on and on it goes...
Which means what the real world? What are we supposed to see now or in the near-future? I assume you've been saying all of this stuff since at least the launch of ChatGPT. Probably longer than that.