I’m not an AI techie and I’m not well educated on LLMs/AI in general. The issue I’m having is the dichotomy between how people talk about it. I’ve heard completely opposite ends of the spectrum. From AI is quickly becoming advanced enough to threaten human society, all the way to its a glorified dictionary/search engine that can’t really do much of anything. I know Lemmy has a steep anti-AI slant. But, can someone talk about this in a way I can wrap my head around why the divide seems so big?
You must log in or register to comment.
- Lemminary@lemmy.worldEnglish22 days
How will “AI kill us all”? I can see it creating harm and getting people out of jobs. But kill us??
- CovfefeKills@lemmy.worldEnglish22 days
Developing new viruses and deadly diseases that spread too fast to be cured. By enabling low cost sensors to resolve messy data for low cost high precision weapons. By eroding the skillset of humanity so that we just fail in a few generations. By accelerating how we were already killing ourselves.
23 daysEd Zitron’s podcast “Better Offline” recently talked about this. There is a small tech community called the Rationalists who believe AI super intelligence is inevitable and it will either accelerate humanity to new heights or kill off the species. These rationalists are actually a very prominent faction within tech and the AI industry. Apparently the language used within top AI firms is largely about the immense danger posed by AI super intelligence if any other group or company were to achieve it first. This creates an echo chamber that makes the people in the industry kind of lose their mind and misinterpret the capability of LLMs.
Everyone outside that faction recognizes that LLMs are just unreliable cloud software with limited use cases and that there’s no evidence LLMs could actually lead to any kind of intelligence.
Edit: Please, someone stop me from commenting on an AI post next time I’m tempted. I’m so tired of people replying, arguing with opinions I don’t have, based entirely around a hypothetical technology that doesn’t exist yet. LLMs make slop. Thats it. They hacked a company after weeks of 100s of instances being run, using old exploits published online. San Francisco will be underwater from climate change before LLMs can do anything more.
- 23 days
My Problem is: Even if your take on AI is true, we give an unreliable piece of software access to the internet and more and more systems and infrastructure. Even if it is not a malicious AI, it can be so unreliable, it might kill us by incompetence. a Sme can be said about some presidents…
LLMs are not intelligent. They lack morals, knowledge, and intent. The only remote risk of extermination is if a company with absolute impunity and endless resources told an LLM to hack the nuclear weapons and if knowledge of how to do that was already published online and processed as training data.
LLMs cannot do anything new, they can only regurgitate information thats already been stolen.
That is simply counter-factual. LLMs can absolutely do things that have not been published before, and they can access knowledge that is not in their training data through RAG. Intelligence is debatable, but reasoning models can reliably imitate “thinking” to a degree, and recursive self-improvement might lead to an autonomous advancement of intelligence. That LLMs allegedly “only regurgitate information” is simply wrong.
It’s been reported a few times that Ukraine is already using AI for drones.
The human operator chooses the target, the AI takes over and eliminates the target.
Is that “just an LLM”?
Seems more capable than that to me. But, I don’t know if this is actually true, or just a claim to frighten the Russians (and me).
- sqgl@sh.itjust.worksEnglish22 days
Not quite true. It was an experiment almost a year ago. I think three Russians were killed.
Am not sure if my pedantic correction brings any comfort to anyone.
The biggest risk I see is Idiocracy. Like, the movie.
Business workers become afraid to do or propose anything without AI signoff. Retail & service workers are told to do what the AI says, the way the AI says to do it, or get fired.
Technology innovator Marshall Brain (RIP) wrote a book in the early 2000s about an AI called “Manna” designed to replace fast food managers:
https://web.archive.org/web/20201204080050/https://marshallbrain.com/manna1
The AI just talks in your ear all day: “Empty one bag of fries into the fryer. You have 6.5 minutes, switch to the sandwich station. Make one Big Burger: grab one patty from the 1/4 pound bin and place it on the griddle… … The fries are ready, turn around and lift them into the drain hopper…”
All day, every day, exactly 8 hours plus mandatory breaks, employees on autopilot listening on ear buds.
All day, every day, exactly 8 hours plus mandatory breaks, employees on autopilot listening on ear buds.
Living under a bridge in a box sounds like a better life.
- MangoCats@feddit.itEnglish23 days
Living under a bridge in a box sounds like a better life.
It’s the Gypsy lifestyle of the new world. Gypsies prefer their life to the alternatives.
- tachikoma@lemmy.todayEnglish22 days
Ahhh one of my favorites. The Iron Cage of Bureaucracy
I saw a funny video of an example. But I cannot remember the name for it. I tried searching for it once but failed. The conficlt was about some dude that exploded.
How topical, I wager I could use AI to find the video. 😏
You may be thinking of the first episode of the US version of Max Headroom?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekg45ub8bsk
“The only people that inactive are pensioners, the sick, or the unemployed. I mean, come on. Who really cares?”
- tachikoma@lemmy.todayEnglish20 days
No that wasnt it.
The video took place in an office. 2 people were in the office. I feel like the main person looked like or was Zack Gilifanakis.
Every minute the clock would announce the new time. He ended up talk to the other lady in the room about how some person on the floor above exploded or blew up or something?
I was a short skit. Only a few minutes long.
