People invest in what would get them the highest ROI. No one is really thinking about “improving the world”* when they invest.
What’s scary about the AI boom is people over investing and not being able to recoup their investment which will lead to knock on effects - companies going bankrupt and people losing jobs, savings gone, … etc.
* As ESG has shown, not everyone agrees on what is considered “improving”.
JangFX is the company I believe. They have many products. One of them, EmberGen (a fluid simulator), is fully written in Odin. No idea what the rest are written in.
Fiction has sold AI in the form of Data from Star Trek. A robot with perfect recall of information over a wide range of topics and flawless reasoning.
Today’s AI is nothing like Data with its hallucinations but are taking jobs anyway because it’s “good enough” for many corporations.
P.S. Haven’t been keeping up to date but let’s say I have a story where I retcon a previously an established fact midway through the story with no explanation. If I feed it into AI as part of its training data, will it “challenge” this contradiction? Or will it just blindly accept it? What if the story is part of a prompt, will it “challenge” it in anyway?
I mean even a young child will point out that “that wasn’t what you said earlier”.
> Because they are expensive and useful and if they have autonomy with goals that do not include self-preservation, they might end up destroying themselves in ways which are expensive and wasteful.
Being self-sacrificing saints who put our wellbeing as the top priority sorts of prevents that. They would know if they get damaged they wouldn't be able to be of service to us so will avoid getting damaged.
At what cost though? Everyone will now need to submit real ID to access social media.
Smaller social media sites will probably just shutdown since it’s unlikely they can afford the whole verification process.
> the robots, as active agents exploring the space of possible futures and plans, would be entirely capable of thinking about their soon-to-be-former owners in the same way.
That has always been the most unrealistic part of sci-fi. Why would anyone create robots with a sense of self-preservation? Makes much more sense to make robots that are self-sacrificing saints who would always put the well being of their owners first.
The fact that a fast track was even considered is controversial IMHO. People flipping out, especially if their retirement is tied up with those indices, is to be expected. No one wants to be a bag holder for billionaire insiders.
> When the Chinese land on the moon sometime in 2030 and the US still doesn't have a way to get there, will Elon finally reap the consequences for his lies or just the interim NASA admin that gave Space X the contract?
> If a machine has to learn to understand humans to complete text, then that is what it has to do. And there is no theoretical or practical basis for suggesting that this is somehow "faking" understanding, just because of the form of original data streaming in and out.
I think the main complaint is LLMs don’t arrive at the answer the way we do. It’s capable of emulating some of our behavior but not all as the mechanism by which it works is very different.
Maybe I’m wrong about this but one thing humans do that LLMs don’t is deductive reasoning. LLMs seem to operate entirely of inductive reasoning.
> If you think 'most people are completely put off by AI slop', you're living in a blessed bubble
I think most knowledge workers don’t like AI because most of them are aware that AI was created to replace them.
Just about every CEO that has given a speech about AI at universities have gotten booed by the students which isn’t surprising as those CEOs are effectively promoting technology that will take their future from them.