I'm truly, deeply alarmed at how the tech industry is trying to insert itself in every human interaction, getting between humans in every possible relationship, and they think that's "better" while absolutely destroying everything that makes society work.
The answer is MORE human-to-human interaction not LESS. FFS.
(screenshot from a substack that landed in my inbox, but you can see this same ethos everywhere, including strained attempts to portray chatbots with "theories of the mind")
The "safety" team were the more fanatical doomsters but the rest of OpenAI is still a cult building their BS god, AGI. Reporters aren't reading up on #TESCREAL and so they are missing the real story here. At least Axios links to AGI skeptic Gary Marcus.
Wild covers quite a few angles but the ones that really struck me were the affinities those pursuing AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) apparently have with the ideas of:
#AI#TESCREAL#SiliconValley#BigTech: "So there's this long tradition of consulting people who use technologies to find out what they need, and to find out why technology does or doesn't work for them. And the big message there was that technologists are probably more ill-equipped to understand that than average people, and to see the industry swing back towards tech authority and tech expertise as making decisions about everything, from how technology is built to what future is the best for all of us, is alarming in that sense.
So we can draw from things like user-centered research. This is how I concluded the paper, is just pointing to all the processes and practices we could start using. There's user-centered research, there's participatory processes, there's... Policy gets made often through consulting with groups that are affected by systems, by policies. There are ways of designing technology so that people can feed back straight into it, or we can just set in some regulations that say, in certain cases, it's not acceptable for technology to make a decision.
I think some of what we have to do is get outside of the United States, because some of the more human rights oriented or user-centered policymaking is happening elsewhere, especially in Europe."
And I'm missing that point a bit here: how much of this do these ‘cheerleader’ types on the photo really believe and how much of it are they just faking to push their ideology to the masses?
I'll read the study to find out more. Thanks for the link!
「 A more imminent threat, he told the Times, is the one posed by American AI giants to cultures around the globe. “These models are producing content and shaping our cultural understanding of the world,” Mensch said. “And as it turns out, the values of France and the values of the United States differ in subtle but important ways.” 」
Does sci-fi shape the future? Tech billionaires from Bill Gates to Elon Musk have often talked about the impact of novels they read as teens, from Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash" to Iain M. Banks' "Culture" series. Big Think's Namir Khaliq spoke to authors including Andy Weir, Lois McMaster Bujold, @cstross and @pluralistic about how much impact they think science fiction has had, or can have.