Soleos

I am sympathetic to the frustration with and resistance to feeling marketed to, but this person just seems to lack self-awareness... And lack of awareness in general. Not a good look.

I won't assume he's representative of large swathes of developers 👀👀👀

Oh man, that was a good one

The Littlest Hobo

XD

Sure, but that true AI won't just involve an LLM, it will be a complex of multi-modal models with specialization and hierarchy--thats basically what big AIs like GPT-5 are doing.

Lol the point about "don't dehumanize" has nothing to do about them or feeling bad for them. They can fuck right off. It's about us not pretending these aren't human monsters, as if being human makes us inherently good, as if our humanity somehow makes us inherently above doing monstrous things. No, to be human is to have the capacity for doing great good and for doing the monstrously terrible.

Nazis aren't monsters because they're inhuman, they're monsters because of it. Other species on the planet might overhunt, displace, or cause depopulation through inadvertent ecological change, but only humanity commits genocide.

This is closer to what I mean by strategy and decisions: https://matthewdwhite.medium.com/i-think-therefore-i-am-no-llms-cannot-reason-a89e9b00754f

LLMs can be helpful for informing strategy, and simulating strings of words that may can be perceived as a strategic choice, but it doesn't have it's own goal-oriented vision.

Buddam tsssss! I too enjoy making fun of big business CEOs as mindless trend-followers. But even "following a trend" is a strategy attributable to a mind with reasoning ability that makes a choice. Now the quality of that reasoning or the effectiveness of that choice is another matter.

As tempting as it is, dehumanizing people we find horrible also risks blinding us to our own capacity for such horror as humans.

No, it's not paradoxical. You are conflating time points.

I won't debate the "value" of CEOs, but in this system, their value is subject to market conditions like any other. Human computers were valued much more before electrical computers were created. Aluminum was worth more than gold before a fast and cheap extraction process was invented.

You could not replace a CEO with a Palm pilot 10 years ago.

They... don't make strategic decisions... That's part of why we hate them no? And we lambast AI proponents because they pretend they do.

It's up to you if it helps you to think of it that way. However, if everyone is on the spectrum, then "autism" is less useful as a term for categorizing a group of people with a shared condition that may need help/accommodation in specific ways. How do you provide special services for autistic people when everyone is "on the spectrum". There's a solution, but requires a different way of categorizing people.

"spectrum" is a useful analogy to the EM spectrum, which is a literal spectrum. The autism spectrum is not a literal spectrum, we call it that because it's a useful way to understand neurodiveristy. However, like any analogy, it eventually falls apart as you go deeper into applying it. It's not the complete way to understand autism nor is it the only applicable analogy.

Autism is not fully understood, but it is characterized by several dimensions that each involve variation from the norm due to a complex of causes. This is why the "spectrum" analogy falls apart--it reduced autism to one dimension. Another analogy might be a crystal that grows in multiple directions, with more growth from the centre being divergence from the norm. Some crystals grow a little bit in all directions, some grow only in a couple directions, and every other combination of amount x direction.

Sorry, I shouldn't be so obtuse on the internet. The point is that corporations in general are not exactly non-people. They are a groups of people. The greed, selfishness, choices to violate privacy, these are all of people, granted in conjunction with the machine of late-capitalism. But there is always this false assumption that just because it's "people" and not a "corporation", it's inherently better, or for the benefit of all people. Your choice isn't between a group of people and some faceless entity, your choice is between different groups of people.

The same people who make up the faceless corporations will participate in your "owned by the people" system. Just look at the US government, supposedly "by the people and for the people", which controls/regulates corporations. Where there is power there is politics and where there is politics there is the accumulation of power. You have to do more to manage the accumulation of power that oppresses than just say "oh just let all the people own the system".