QuietOil9491

QuietOil9491 t1_j21xj5t wrote

Reply to Robots, AI, and Automation. When and What do we do then? by Snipgan

Why do you believe oligarchs want to share any of the wealth with you? Why do you believe they care whether people rot in homeless encampments, or favelas, or shanty-towns, or prisons, or cobalt mines? Why do you believe they even want you around? What use are you to them?

Who do you think the “we” in your question refers to? The ones getting crushed or the ones in power? Do you believe you’re in the second category? Why?

−3

QuietOil9491 t1_j21k6hl wrote

Reply to What, exactly, are we supposed to do until AGI gets here? by gaudiocomplex

“Prompt-Engineering” as a job has a shelf-life shorter than desert gas station sushi on a hot day.

If the arts, which were widely believed to be safer than most jobs, is currently being deprecated by AI, the human input element of that equation will last only as long as it takes the developers to refine the front-end interface

19

QuietOil9491 t1_j1c1b54 wrote

Reply to Why is this sub so luddite now ? by Shelfrock77

OP has no grasp of history, capitalism, the AI misalignment issue, or seemingly anything that pierced their fantasy safe-space where they live in a magical video game.

The rest of us know that the oligarchs won’t just hand over utopia if they manage to get it operational, and that technology tends to have massive destructive consequences and in the case of the singularity, there may be no second chance

If you truly respected the level of paradigm shift here, you would also be concerned that we are making our doom

12

QuietOil9491 t1_j0tg7cx wrote

Reply to The social contract when labour is automated by Current_Side_4024

The problem is the wealthy have always oppressed the poor. Technology has often first enhanced these tendencies. It’s not always guaranteed that we will survive the abuse of a new technology against humanity. AI absolutely has the capacity to destroy humanity.

It’s entirely upon the 0.001% to not utterly fuck over humanity but that would mean they would have to willingly give up wealth, power, and inequality; which are their core values

1

QuietOil9491 t1_j0pnecj wrote

Reply to comment by Wassux in Why are people so opposed to caution and ethics when it comes to AI? by OldWorldRevival

Dude, this take is dishonest as fuck.

  • AI isn’t a person
  • AI doesn’t “learn” like a person does
  • Human people are imbued with rights by function of existing, AI doesn’t have human rights
  • AI image models are “trained” by inputting libraries of copyrighted images, without consent of the artists whose work is being used to allow those AI to function

You know full well AI isn’t sentient, nor acting on its own, so it’s not in any way shape or form “learning like a person does”

It’s a fucking computer, run by corporations, for profit, using the work of others without consent

−1