pull down to refresh
Now you're saying that someone like you or me training an open model and publishing the weights is worse than a proven scammer like Sam Altman (never forget WorldCoin and biometric data harvesting) getting billions off a closed model and open sourcing only crap? What makes you think ChatGPT (closed source) isn't lying to you already?
It is lying, already. Giving the power to doe these extra little modifications on AI through open learning and programming may not be the best decision for all the reasons you mentioned about COVID. Letting the USG or any other villain do their operations on the training may not be too wise, although you would suspect them of doing it anyway. You know, villains will villain.
Wasn't the problem with the mad scientists that they were lying?
Well, yes, they are lying all the time, but the main problem is they never think of consequences beyond the test tube they are looking at or the device they have just constructed. Unfortunately, for the rest of us, the test tube product escapes into the population, killing innocent people and the devices are good for 100,00 people a pop!
Now, do we want released whatever the next MAD SCIENTISTTM or MAD PROGRAMMER or whatever kind of idiot that wants to realease a vengeful or even revengeful AI on the population? Didn’t we get enough of that with COVID19? Aren’t we going to get enough of that with the next Gates Special?
Bitcoiners don’t seem to be into the nuts and bolts of the economy, at all. Perhaps they are just speculating, vis-a-vis fiat. I just don’t understand.
Shocked, absolutely shocked that people are coming around to the idea of markets functioning better than monopolists!
but the idea seems marketed more aggressively to women.
Yes, that takes away their agency. Then their options are limited to what has become politically acceptable according to the new brainwashing! This way their are no children and mass migration is needed to fill the gap created by the lying feminists.
In the past, I had a great interest in traveling and did it using Lonely Planets Books to great effect. Currently, I do garden and cook, including canning my own garden products. But, the shortcut of AI is not for me due to some of the above comments. I feel it is better for me to learn what is necessary and store it in my own head for use without electricity.
AI are practical, fake and dumb. Those who need this cannot stop for 5 minutes to do their own work or to ask for help from another human mind.
It is all for the convenience of the matter. People are just falling into the convenience trap as if they were lemmings going over the cliff. You know, shut the working mind down and follow the rest of the lemmings to wherever they are going. A sad commentary on humanity, isn’t it?
The other point of humans just being a conduit from one AI to another AI also strikes a bad tone to me, but it may be true.
I had understood those conditions before reading this article. This article had a slightly different approach: contracts and private property that has nothing to do with state derived legal fiat from state courts. I appreciated this approach more than just the state, by it’s fiat, declaring limits to free speech because feelz.
People almost never even consider the possibility of private rule making when thinking about these things.
Yes, that is why the “roads” problem is so hard to solve. Roads were originally, here in the US, made by private entities and had tolls and such for the users. The same situation went with bridges and ferries, they were privately built and operated until the state, by force of arms, took them from the private owners and made them public property. To me, anyway, the privately set rulings seem to be much more effective on giving people what they desire.
There are layers of rationalization.
Yeah, that’s the problem, too many layers of rationalizations to cover up the raw truth of the matter. Unfortunately, there are complications for other people when their rationalized theories and models get turned into policy prescriptions for the rest of us through the power of the Central Banks or the state.
It’s more like wanting to work within the consensus of the field because that’s what gets published and publishing is how we advance.
Isn’t that just a way of saying that there is more money if you knuckle under to the reigning paradigm? The more that you can publish, the more you can advance on the academic totem pole, the more you advance the more money you can rake in.
Oftentimes, what macroeconomists are working on is relaxing the assumptions of those unrealistic models in ways we would approve of. They just aren’t willing to abandon them entirely.
Working on making the impossible possible seems to be a waste of time to me. However, for them it is not a waste of time but a way to appease their ultimate employers, the state clowns.
I don’t really know since I have no relationship with AI at all. And, from what I can see, I really don’t want to start, either.
This was excellent! I am hard pressed to imagine a worse form of writing. Maybe I'm too full of myself but I've never asked an llm to edit or review writing -- I'm certain it would ruin what I like about my writing.
When I was teaching at either level, I had the displeasure of seeing that style of writing quite frequently!! It was the equivalent of pushing my head through a bowl of mush! The worst came when I was teaching a capstone project. They would just not say anything controversial or even startling! That was their chance to say almost anything they wanted that fit with their plan, but they just couldn’t cough it up. And a lot of my students were adults with lots of real world experience, too!
i just think that Scam Altman is really pulling a number on us with this AI scheme. The Chinese pulled of a new AI with much less time and money, they said. Clowns will be clowns, but the funny thing about it is that the normies are sucking it up and laughing it out through their noses, but taking it seriously! That is what I find seriously out of kilter.
Most have this, and therefore, these aren't trained by a human but by another LLM (often chatgpt) and therefore inherit biases.
Whooooow….. what you are implying is that the current AI is nothing more than turtles stacked higher on turtles! The AI problems are stacking themselves one-upon-another without circease. Isn’t it about time to train another AI from scratch to avoid previous problems? After all, these tech broz are hauling in billions upon billions of dollars to make their products. Sometimes people are even saying this is the new big thing!
It’s a very good question and I don’t know the answer. I always found it hard to square.
Try this one on for size: they keep using them because those are the answers the paymaster/clowns are looking for! Like everyone else, the people making the economic analyses and prognostications wants to make a healthy, comfortable living! The best way to do that is to please your masters, isn’t it?
I will have to agree with you! But, why is it that the general population falls for the kind of isht like rent controls and free bus rides and any other free stuff? What are the public schools and universities pumping into their heads? I guess when you start framing everything into oppressor/oppressed ideology, taking from someone else or even if it is yourself is a good idea. At least the intermediary gets to stick some to his fingers!
Economists have long known that their models have many types of instabilities, irrespective of this theorem.
Then why do they insist on making policy recommendations and screwing up the economy rather than let it control itself through the myriad decisions made by all consumers and producers? Their models are bogus and their conclusions seem to only fit the requirements of their paymasters, the clowns in the state.
moneylife resources.