220 sats \ 9 replies \ @kepford 3 Jun \ on: Nic Carter: the NVDA rally is unnerving, and not because of AI safety fears econ
This is horse shit.
Also nonsense.
In fact I would argue it will make it worse. We already see public figures claiming things are AI and do we really know if they are or not? Not only can someone fake something. Someone can claim something is fake that is not. I do agree that signed / validated content will increase but this will hardly be the end of post truth.
Also don't buy this.
The "end to post-truth" is so wrong that I assumed at first it was a typo. Signed blockchain attestations could happen (?) but will in no way compensate for the overwhelming shitstorm of nonsense in terms of how it populates people's internal realities.
Yeah no one is going to look up from their tiktok to figure out if some altered photo/video is digitally signed on a blockchain.
I do agree with him that as AI continues to get better we're going to see a massive deflation of human labor costs throughout every industry. White collar first and then manual jobs when robots and full self driving are realized.
reply
Well, surely it would show up in the client, like a much stronger version of NIP-05 in nostr. Perhaps even, the client refuses to show the media unless it's signed, and the posting function has signing all rolled into it.
100% agree user friction kills it. How many people use pgp? However, https is pretty widespread and I certainly feel an emotional reaction when I have to go to a http site and my browser acts like I've got an incoming cruise missile.
Horseshit: because you don't agree with the whole AGI is coming thing or because you dont think carter was as much of a super awesome early adopter as he claims?
Nonsense: it seems that if a relatively small percentage of media rolls over to signed content by default it will significantly devalue 100% of the non-signed content. Hard to imagine non-signed being taken seriously. (Obviously, I am hoping that there long exist places like 4chan, where all claims are made and everyone knows it's a free for all, but such content already seems to inhabit a separate sphere.)
What you don't buy: I had the hardest time believing his idea that there will be a large group of people who are simply out of work. Perhaps, though, this is because I mostly read the writing of tech-optimists who are working hard to convince me that AI leads to new jobs, not less jobs. Are you skeptical of AI leading to fewer jobs?
reply
I don't agree with this assertion
simply throwing more data and compute at these models can plausibly create AGI, or something close to it.
I do not see AI as actual intelligence. The words give a false perspective of what these pattern recognition algorithms are doing.
I do not believe AGI is real. First off it is just speculation about what could happen. Its way to aspirational vs. technical. Way to much magic. Call be a skeptic. When I see strong evidence I will reconsider.
The nonsense with non-signed content is the assumption people want the truth. Some say they do but they do not what their framing to be challenged. These tools will change the media but tactics will adapt. Where I do agree with him is that trust will continue to decrease. I just don't think most people or institutions seek to show or find truth.
I am skeptical of AI leading to fewer jobs. In a short period individuals will possibly be put out of work but I reject the idea that tech advancement leads to long term fewer things for people to do. Things that people are qualified or experienced to do may decrease but that is temporary. In tech revolutions of the past we have seen this. Essentially this argument is that we will solve all the problems and not have anything to do.... I'm prepared to be wrong but I'm not alone with this perspective.
reply
I pretty much agree with you on all three counts. Especially the first and last.
As to signing content, people may not be interested in the truth, but they are even less interested in being embarrassed. How will the outrage machine work when outrageous (but fake) things are everywhere and impossible to discern from the real things?
Consider any of the recent scandals: it is great fun, apparently, to be scandalized by p diddy's treatment of women, but if we all know the videos are probably fake...more scandal. People like scandal and there is a strong interest there alone for making sure things are accurate enough to continue warranting the outrage.
Signing content does not have to be about seeking truth; it might just be about having someone to blame. If no opinion or action can be reliably attributed to anyone, I suspect there will be demand for cryptographically signing content if for no other reason than so we can still get made at the people who hold the opinions and do the actions.
reply
carter was as much of a super awesome early adopter as he claims?
Carter is interesting but not interesting enough for me to care about his ego. Dude has lost it because bitcoiners called him out for his crypto promotion. I follow and respect many people that are not bitcoin only but this dude's ego is something else. This thread also makes me think he's naive. But as I said, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm just to skeptical and grumpy. Maybe I've been through to many hype cycles and heard bold promises before. I mean, honestly that is why it took me so long to dive into bitcoin. It sounded like hype. And a lot of it is hype. But sometimes, maybe even most of the time there is substance under the hype. What I've learned to do is try to ignore the hype and the people that reject something altogether. Usually both are wrong. This sounds like Carter has fell for the hype. The "AI" tools are tools. Its not magic. Its not terminator. I frankly find it surprising that people still believe the boy who cried wolf over and over again.
Then again, people still think we live in a free country. That voting matters. And some clown in DC is one of the most important things to your life. So I guess I am falling for the hype in some way myself.
reply