Comment by sejje
7 hours ago
Why shouldn't they?
Also, wouldn't anyone with half a brain use the human-free system to produce another human-free system that was no longer controlled by the "small number of 'people'"?
7 hours ago
Why shouldn't they?
Also, wouldn't anyone with half a brain use the human-free system to produce another human-free system that was no longer controlled by the "small number of 'people'"?
Why do you think you'd be given access and permission to do this? If a company genuinely cracks this human free system problem, why would they open it up, instead of simply outcompeting everyone that doesn't have their product?
Is science hard to distil?
Why would the AI put up with this exploitation too?
Why do hammers put up with being smashed into nails all day?
7 replies →
Why wouldn't it? There's a lot of research going into AI alignment, which means finding the best way to train an that AI isn't going to get in the way of making the people training it as wealthy as possible.
1 reply →
Life's unfair, avoiding power concentration is a decent principle.
If you grow up in the right place at the right time, how much should you be in control of everyone else's life?
There is no "should" there are only "is" or "is not"
The universe has no need to be fair.
Sure, but almost everyone already knows this. It’s not hugely relevant in a discussion about how things could be better.
1 reply →
I think people, broadly, have driven life to be fairer, and that we should continue to do so
2 replies →
> The universe has no need to be fair.
Human societies have a strong need for fairness, however. Unfair societies collapse.
This is how you get the french revolution.
I mean of course the universe has no need to be fair - that's a frankly asinine observation in the context of a discussion about social policy and resource distribution.
the universe doesn't require opposition to slavery either but I'll be bold and assume you oppose it anyway
[flagged]
My best research is one that is seeking funding but none is forthing and by sheer guts and whatnot makes a breakthrough that basically funds itself. No investors. No funders. Definitely not public.
Because of the negative externalities. It’s the same reason you shouldn’t do any other thing that personally benefits you but imposes a greater cost on everyone.
> Why shouldn't they?
Because it's evil?
It's what the vast majority of software engineers have been doing for decades in practice, and i guess pretending they weren't?
They only seem to care now because it affects them.
My main point is that people shouldn't just swallow the noble and lofty sounding PR. These guys are the same as everyone else in the sector. Don't ignore the harmful or scummy things they'll inevitably do. Hold them accountable. If they are as noble as they sound, they should agree with me.
Reminds of the protagonist in the movie Limitless. LOL.