@FaceDeer@fedia.io
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

FaceDeer

@FaceDeer@fedia.io

Basically a deer with a human face. Despite probably being some sort of magical nature spirit, his interests are primarily in technology and politics and science fiction.

Spent many years on Reddit and then some time on kbin.social.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Not every new technology or shift in the economy is a "bubble" that's inevitably going to "pop" someday.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

But this one definitely is.

Such confidence. Why do you think so?

Many of the shifts that have happened in the economy are a result of capabilities that existing AI models actually demonstrably have right now, rather than anticipation of future developments. Even if no further developments happen those existing capabilities aren't going to just "go away" again somehow.

Also worth noting, blockchains are still around and are doing just fine.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Why do you think that's its primary purpose? It has lots of uses. The point is that it's doing fine, it hasn't "gone away." And if you need a non-volatile cryptocurrency for some purpose there are a variety of stablecoins designed to meet that need.

AI can't reach its promised capability of doing everything for us automatically

Your criterion for a "bubble popping" is that the technology doesn't grow to completely dominate the world and do everything that anyone has ever imagined it could do? That's a pretty extreme bar to hold it to, I don't know of any technology that's passed it.

It's just advanced Clippy and autocomplete. It can't replace anyone senior.

So it can replace people lower than "senior?" That's still quite revolutionary.

When spreadsheet and word processing programs became commonplace whole classes of jobs ceased to exist. Low-level accountants, secretarial pools, and so forth. Those jobs never came back because the spreadsheet and word processing programs are still working fine in that role to this day. AI's going to do the same to another swath of jobs. Dismissing it as "just advanced Clippy" isn't going to stop it from taking those jobs, it's only going to make the people who were replaced by it feel a little worse about what they previously did for a living.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

They are, though. The total market cap across cryptocurrencies right now is about $2.75 trillion.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

I'm just pointing out that they're still there. If it's a scam then at this point it's one of history's biggest and longest-running.

And whether any particular cryptocurrency qualifies as a security in any particular jurisdiction is a complicated question, some do and some don't. This is about cryptocurrency as a whole so calling them an unlicensed security would not be accurate.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

You've switched from saying that a cryptocurrency's "primary purpose" is as a currency for transactions to saying that they're securities, those are not remotely similar things.

Anyway. Are you aware that, assuming the Gartner hype cycle actually does apply here (it's not universal) and AI is really in the "trough of disillusionment", beyond that phase lies the "slope of enlightenment" wherein the technology settles into long-term usage? I feel like you're tossing terminology around in this discussion without knowing a lot about what it actually means.

No, it can't, because it isn't and cannot be made trustworthy. If you need a human to review the output for hallucinations then you might as well save yourself the licensing costs and let the human do the work in the first place.

If you think it can't replace anyone then why say "It can't replace anyone senior"?

Also, what licensing costs? Some AI providers charge service fees for using them, but as far as I'm aware none of them claim copyright over the output of LLMs. And there are open-weight LLMs you can run yourself on your own computer if you want complete independence.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

That wasn't me.

Apologies, you're right. I took care to double check the wording but neglected to spot the different username.

Hasn't it already been ruled that LLM outputs cannot be copyrighted, or was that just patents and I'm misremembering?

No, there have been a lot of misleading news articles with headlines like that but nothing like that has been decided in any jurisdictions that I'm aware of.

The most popular news story to get headlines like that is the Thaler v. Perlmutter case, if you do a Google search for that you'll find an endless stream of "U.S. Court holds that AI generated works cannot be copyrighted" headlines. But that's not remotely what the case was actually about. What actually happened was that Thaler generated an image using an AI and then went to the US Copyright office to register the copyright *in the name of the program that generated it." That is, he went to the Copyright office and told them "the copyright for this work is solely held by the computer that generated it. Nobody else was involved in its creation." The copyright office responded "that's silly, copyright can only be held by a person (human or corporate). A computer is not a person." Since the list of copyright-holders Thaler was claiming was therefore zero, the Copyright office ruled that the work must be in the public domain.

Thaler sued, and in the subsequent court case he tried to add himself to the list of copyright-holders. The judge said "no, that's not what this suit is about, knock it off. You told the copyright office you didn't hold a copyright to that work, and as a result their ruling that the work was uncopyrighted was correct."

If he'd tried to claim copyright for himself from the start there wouldn't have been any problem. There have been other instances where humans have registered copyrights for works that they used an AI to generate. The only reason Thaler failed was because he specifically and explicitly said that he wasn't claiming copyright over it. This has unfortunately turned into one of those "suing McDonalds for making their coffee hot" semi-urban-legends.

And even if a U.S. court did make a ruling along those lines, the U.S. isn't the whole world. There are plenty of countries out there that would be happy to take the lead instead if the U.S. decided it didn't want to be supportive of local AI-driven industry.

Ah yes, because rolling your own unreliable text generator is so much less expensive. XD

It really is. I run LLMs on my home computer myself, for fun, using a commodity graphics card. The models it can run don't quite reach ChatGPT's level of sophistication but they're close, and they have the advantage that I can control them much more precisely to perform the tasks that I want them to perform. If I wanted to use a more sophisticated open model there are cloud providers that could run it for me for pennies, I just like having the hardware completely under my control.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

It isn't a "shadow", its current market cap is near its historical high point right now.

If you have no use for it then by all means ignore it. But calling it a bubble that has popped is simply factually inaccurate. Other people evidently find value in it.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Heh, I suppose I can grant papal indulgence as a scam. Were I feeling edgy I could one up that and label the church as a whole as a scam. But since the usual accusation leveled against cryptocurrency is "ponzi scheme" I looked that up and noted that Madoff's the current record holder for one of those at a mere $65 billion.

Yeah, the kbin.social week of downtime was the final nudge I needed to set up an alternative account here. But honestly I was getting very frustrated with kbin.social's flakeiness already before then. I appreciate Ernest's work, but something like kbin can't be a single-person show in the long run. I hope he does well but now I don't have to reload the page every time I want to vote or comment.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

I have no interest in the specifics of why the price is up or down, I'm not a speculator. That's not the point of all this. The only point is it's still there. Which it is.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Two weeks later he died of appendicitis.

FaceDeer, (edited )
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Bing Chat has become my go-to search engine for situations where I'm not looking for a specific website or other such resource, and instead want some kind of information or knowledge. I'd recommend giving it a shot. It does a websearch in the background, puts the results into its hidden context, and then builds an answer for you based on the information it dredged up, complete with links. You can then clarify your question or ask for further details and get a back-and-forth going, it's really handy. I'd recommend giving it a shot, I believe it works without needing an account now.

Oh, I should note: don't use it like an old-school search engine where you just type a couple of keywords in. Be conversational and give context to your search. Say for example "I'm planting a garden in Witchita, Kansas. What climate zone is it, and what sorts of flowers grow well there?" And then perhaps follow that with "Are any of those attractive to hummingbirds?" Or whatever. That should help it figure out what information to look for and how to distill what you want to know from it.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Bear in mind that you're in a "politics" community comment section, so you're probably much more informed about the subject than the vast majority of people.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Scientology?

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

A politician isn't really any more authoritative on medical matters than a random kbin user. And possibly even more attention-seeking.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Yeah, exactly. People love to amplify any negatives they can find about Musk, it plays to the rage mobs and that translates into clicks and endorphins.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

...working on the "thought chips" are working on a cure. Or a workaround for the handicap, at least.

Would you accuse the guy who invented the wheelchair of wasting their time on a fancy mobile lay-z-boy instead of "working on a cure"?

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

The goal of Neuralink is to accomplish far more than what non-invasive BCI can, but you can't leap straight to a finished product on your very first test. That's part of what testing means, it's research.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

It says that a US representative claimed that Neuralink had violations, and the FDA responded that it didn't. He said/she said, with one of the sayers being a politician and the other being the actual agency in charge of determining whether there were violations. Specifically:

The agency also said it routinely carries out inspections after a human trial is approved. When it inspected Neuralink, the FDA said it did not find violations that would undermine the safety of the trial.

And sure enough, the trial appears to be a success. Got anything else to back this up?

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Ah, back to "we don't want advances that could help quadriplegics because Twitter man bad!" Again.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

If that's what it takes to get the tech into the heads of people who need it, yay marketing.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

I'm saying that reporting disproportionately negative news about someone is not going to lead to a realistic view of the world.

For example, consider Fox News pouncing on every possible headline that could paint Joe Biden in a bad light because Fox viewers already hate Biden and such reports draw engagement as a result. Nor a good thing if your goal is a realistic view of the world, right? Same idea here.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

Sure, they should be reported on. The problem is in the focus and bias present in the reporting overall. If all you ever report on are the bad things that could conceivably be linked to a particular person who is popular to hate, the overall result can be an unrealistic portrayal of the world even if each individual story and each individual fact within them is true. History is rife with distortions like that.

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

"They were getting too close to figuring it out."

FaceDeer,
@FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

There's an old card game called Illuminati that I rather enjoyed back in the day. It was a conspiracy-themed game where the cards represented different organizations, like the Boy Scouts or the Mafia, and you built a secret network of organizations controlling other organizations as you tried to achieve world domination. Cards were grouped into "types", such as "criminal" or "government", and each type had an opposite type that was considered an "enemy". It gave you penalties when you tried to have a group control an enemy group and bonuses when you had one try to destroy an enemy group. So when the Mafia tried to control the Biker Gangs that worked well since they were both "criminal", for example.

The "fanatic" card type was special. Any "fanatic" card was considered to be the mortal enemy of any other "fanatic" card. It was the most realistic part of the game, aside from the orbital mind control lasers of course.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • JUstTest
  • tacticalgear
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • Durango
  • cubers
  • Youngstown
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • ngwrru68w68
  • kavyap
  • GTA5RPClips
  • provamag3
  • ethstaker
  • InstantRegret
  • Leos
  • normalnudes
  • everett
  • khanakhh
  • osvaldo12
  • cisconetworking
  • modclub
  • anitta
  • tester
  • megavids
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •