AGI is coming

[DocWatts]

None of the naysayers here are disputing that AI is going to continue to impact society in a profound way. (I'd contend that anyone who disputes this point is living in denial of Reality.)

What's being disputed is that Artificial General Intelligence (usually understood to mean human level intelligence) is just around the corner.

Edited February 27 by DocWatts

[bebotalk]

7 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Exactly. The treaty was signed to prevent other nations from developing nuclear weapons. And what happened? India, Pakistan, North Korea and even Israel developed nuclear weapons anyway. Even US and Russia withdrew from the treaty. Which is why all such treaties are utter trash.

The exact same thing will happen with AI, now that corporations are playing the game. So, they would absolutely zero flying fucks about any "treaty". If you try to regulate them too much they move to a country that does not try to regulate them and train their AI on all the data they can get their hands on.

I oppose all regulations that increases the barrier to entry to AI. Some basic regulations are necessary.

I do not doubt the sincerity or good will of your arguments. Just that it will not produce the intended effects that you are looking for.

India for one never signed the NFT. Most countries that have signed it have adhered to it. Maybe see reality for what it is, and not your US conservative lens of such, since American conservatives often think things are true withotu seeing reality. Pakistan and North Korea never signed it anyhow. 

So it has had its intended effect. You said that enemy nations cannot co-operate. this is therefore false. the world isn't as black and white as you make it out to be. Since when is any agreement perfectly executed? even treaties between allies aren't always followed. Look at NATO. keep on seeing life through a formulaic lens.

Corporations are subject to state law. If there is any international law stating that governments must prevent companies under their jurisdiction don't adhere to AI, so be it. 

Edited February 28 by bebotalk

[bebotalk]

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3241177/biden-xi-set-pledge-ban-ai-autonomous-weapons-drones-nuclear-warhead-control-sources

 

Enemies can't ever dialogue. 

lol.

 

[Leo Gura]

On 2/27/2024 at 0:48 AM, Bobby_2021 said:

I do not care about some shameless billionaire adding an extra few billion into his pocket.

Oh, it's gonna be way worse than that. These AI companies will suck up trillions of dollars by exploiting little folk who are powerless to stop them.

Where do you think that billionaire got his billions? He did it by exploiting others.

If you let them, these AI companies will enslave you. Of course it will all be done under the pretense of improving the world. Not much different than what happened with factory workers in the 1800s.

Edited February 28 by Leo Gura

[Heaven]

46 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Oh, it's gonna be way worse than that. These AI companies will suck up trillions of dollars by exploiting little folk who are powerless to stop them.

Where do you think that billionaire got his billions? He did it by exploiting others.

If you let them, these AI companies will enslave you. Of course it will all be done under the presence of improving the world. Not much different than what happened with factory workers in the 1800s.

Let’s open a short position on Nvidia together. We might make a few bucks to win the rat race.(Not a financial advise)

[Bobby_2021]

1 hour ago, bebotalk said:

Most countries that have signed it have adhered to it

Dude what I am saying is that AI treaty will not be singed by countries powerful enough to develop their own AI. They will literally ignore the treaty like India and Israel ignored the NPT. 

The countries who did sign the treaty were too weak to develop their own nukes. It's not like they had the capacity to do it anyway. 

And you do realize that even Russia violated the treaty and US pulled out of it. That's how petty these agreements are. The moment it's inconvenient for you, you can pull out of it. 

You will be shooting yourself in the foot by not developing your own AI. 

For eg Ukraine didn't develop their own nuclear weapons for honouring some shitty treaty and now they are paying a hefty price for it. Nukes could have easily prevented this sort of Russian invasion. That's what's going to happen to countries that doesn't pursue AI. They will be overshadowed by countries who do develop their own AI. 

2 hours ago, bebotalk said:

So it has had its intended effect

The intended effect was to prevent more countries from developing nukes apart from the existing ones. They clearly failed at that. 

2 hours ago, bebotalk said:

Pakistan and North Korea never signed it anyhow. 

North Korea signed and later pulled off. Because without nukes, they would they would be under the control of the US or bigger powers.

2 hours ago, bebotalk said:

You said that enemy nations cannot co-operate.

They don't have to be enemies to not cooperate. They could simply follow their own interests which is to develop their own AI. 

The laws that you make only apply to a certain jurisdiction. They would do all the same in a different jurisdiction. It's so easy to skid these laws. Which are meaningless anyway. 

[Bobby_2021]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Oh, it's gonna be way worse than that. These AI companies will suck up trillions of dollars by exploiting little folk who are powerless to stop them.

If they suck up trillions of dollars, then someone has to give them trillions of dollars. Will you give up trillions of dollars for free? only if you get more than a trillion dollars in value. I will be glad if a trillion dollars of value is pumped into this economy. That would do wonders to the economy in a scale more than you could imagine.

If he is raising a trillion from investors. I couldn't care less. Let him do it. In that case he is making himself a slave by being in debt to those investors. There will be a lot of investors, which is not going to be a problem. There is a chance that none of this will pay out and the money will be locked up in research & development. That is good.

If he gets a trillion-dollar contract from the govt, then you should be concerned. Because that is the taxpayer money of the people. Government contracts are scary. In that case, you should blame the government for empowering trillion-dollar corpos. 

If the "little folks" can get a share of the trillion dollars in value, then that would empower the little folk. You can use Ai without having a single penny. You should look forward to increasing competition in the market by having more players and easing the regulations. That way no single corpos can increase the prices inorganically. 

Stop seeing everything from the eyes of the Karl Marx. Even he would change the mind on capitalism based on whatever that is going on at the moment.

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Where do you think that billionaire got his billions? He did it by exploiting others.

He got billions because you keep sending him money. You keep using his products even when you can choose not to. 

He got billions from solving real problems. 

And you use the products of people who exploit their workers. If you want to mass produce anything, you need to exploit the labor. This is altruistic exploitation and a necessary one. Do you want to exploit people and build cheap solar panels, nuclear plants and electric cars to produce clean energy or die from climate change?

The exploitation is not done from a shameless attempt to get rich. He is solving genuine problems, and the market prefers exploitative solutions by wanting cheap cars, solar panels etc. He can pay his workers more if you are willing to pay more for a Tesla. So, you are doing the exploitation by buying apple and tesla.

If it is exploitative, you can choose not to get exploited. No one is forcing anyone to work for a billionaire. 

But someone has to make the food with capital as cheaply as possible so that people can be fed.

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

If you let them, these AI companies will enslave you. Of course it will all be done under the presence of improving the world. Not much different than what happened with factory workers in the 1800s.

The AI companies can never enslave you on their own. They do not have the monopoly on violence. Government is the one responsible for ensuring the law and order. The best that AI companies can ever do is to get lots of paper money. That paper money is valuable simply because the government says so. 

If the government is easily corruptible, then you know where the problem is. 

The real problem is when you are squeezed out of alternatives because the government increases the barrier to entry for smaller business by increasing regulations and random stupid fees for doing business. That way you are allowed to buy services from one mega corporation. All problems of slavery come from the government not doing it job or when the government is handing out contracts worth billions to these companies or lobbying to kill small business by overregulating them. 

Most problems would instantly solve if you were not going to pester small business from providing services by making use of AI. This is how you democratize AI and put power in the hands of the people.

[erik8lrl]

3 hours ago, Heaven said:

Let’s open a short position on Nvidia together. We might make a few bucks to win the rat race.(Not a financial advise)

Lol, just buy whatever Nancy Pelosi is buying at this point, you can't lose lol
 

[erik8lrl]

https://x.com/DynamicWebPaige/status/1762642914516357389?s=20

[erik8lrl]

https://x.com/Jason/status/1762661211207086374?s=20

[erik8lrl]

 

 

[bebotalk]

6 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Dude what I am saying is that AI treaty will not be singed by countries powerful enough to develop their own AI. They will literally ignore the treaty like India and Israel ignored the NPT. 

The countries who did sign the treaty were too weak to develop their own nukes. It's not like they had the capacity to do it anyway. 

And you do realize that even Russia violated the treaty and US pulled out of it. That's how petty these agreements are. The moment it's inconvenient for you, you can pull out of it. 

You will be shooting yourself in the foot by not developing your own AI. 

For eg Ukraine didn't develop their own nuclear weapons for honouring some shitty treaty and now they are paying a hefty price for it. Nukes could have easily prevented this sort of Russian invasion. That's what's going to happen to countries that doesn't pursue AI. They will be overshadowed by countries who do develop their own AI. 

The intended effect was to prevent more countries from developing nukes apart from the existing ones. They clearly failed at that. 

North Korea signed and later pulled off. Because without nukes, they would they would be under the control of the US or bigger powers.

They don't have to be enemies to not cooperate. They could simply follow their own interests which is to develop their own AI. 

The laws that you make only apply to a certain jurisdiction. They would do all the same in a different jurisdiction. It's so easy to skid these laws. Which are meaningless anyway. 

All five of the original nuclear powers have signed it and by and large stick to it. India never signed it, but so what? Which law has perfect application? It's better to have some regulation if it's not perfect. life isn't perfect. It was the original nuclear powers that developed the treaty. The USA still is a signatory to it, as is Russia. The consensus is that it generally has worked in stopping the spread of nuclear weapons. 

My point is you said that enemies cannot cooperate. The USA and USSR definitely were not allies at the time. and countries generally don't share nuclear weapons. It's an example that many countries can agree on given topics that affect us all. I don't see why that's taxing. Nation-states like individuals will do their own thing. Because some people still drive over speed limits it doesn't mean speeding laws are invalid. You keep asserting that because one country is acting contrary to the common interest, then it makes any and all attempts at regulation false. Since when is life that clean-cut? Better that there is some regulation over no regulation. I don't know why you think everything must have perfect application. 

From what both Xi and Putin have said in the public domain, they see the potential dangers of AI. So maybe there is a chance for them to co-operate. There are global climate change treaties between "enemies" that most are committed to.  Why do you pose as smart but don't get that there aren't always perfect solutions to things?

https://www.state.gov/nuclear-nonproliferation-treaty/. Your own country hasn't pulled out at all. 

I don't see the fundamental difference between this and a prospective AI treaty. Both are threats to us all. It's better to have some regulation over no regulation at all. Your view imho is myopic and dangerous, and based on fallacies and blunted thinking. 

Edited February 28 by bebotalk

[Leo Gura]

@Bobby_2021 You have a naive view of how capitalism extracts money out of people. It's not just because you buy stuff at the store.

For example, all these large tech companies have made billions by selling your private data which they effectively stole from the poplution without consent. It's very hard to make billions without cheating someone in the process.

Edited February 28 by Leo Gura

[Bobby_2021]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@Bobby_2021 You have a naive view of how capitalism extracts money out of people. It's not just because you buy stuff at the store.

For example, all these large tech companies have made billions by selling your private data which they effectively stole from the poplution without consent. It's very hard to make billions without cheating someone in the process.

Listen there is a lot of unrolling to do because what you said contradicts itself.

1. Why do Facebook and google "steal" your data? They sell that data to businesses owners who are providing some sort of product or a service to people.  So they still get rich from buying stuff from the store. FB is solving a difficult problem in the market. If you have a product that people love, and there are people who love your product, how do you reach them? By collecting their data and selling it to business owners who have something to sell. 

The data is valuable only because it facilitates sales. So, they still get rich from connecting people who would eventually buy from their store.

If you are a small business owner who wants to sell electric kettles, then you could do an ad campaign that targets such sort of people. Now could be help combat climate change by selling solar panels over Facebook as a small business owner. All of these are doing incredible things for the economy.

It's not just mega corporations making each other rich. It is putting power in the hands of small business owners who can now deliver a service or sell some cool shirt. This would be impossible without collecting or "stealing" user data. 

--------------------------------------------------------

2. Is it really stealing if you had given them consent to access your files and your data that you willingly entered into their platform?

So technically you did consent, even though their manufactured content in a sneaky way. You cannot install these social media in your phone unless you sign their terms and conditions. It clearly says that they have the rights to use the data of their users to improve the services they provide you. 

---------------------------------------------------------------

3. Consent does not matter anyway since most people simply do not care. 

They would rather have their data taken and get a better service than not have their data taken at all and be given an OS that they could custom design.

Capitalism does not never give you options. It is up for the market to decide what options to choose from.

Apple and Microsoft collect data to improve the services they give you. Are you pissed off? Use Linux. The solution already exists. Why do you waste your money and time to pay for Microsoft or Apple?

Because collecting user data helps them make an OS where most of the problems faced by the normal folk are already solved by the corporation selling them. Linux does not collect any data. But you need to learn more about computers to install and use Linux.  They want a solution that works out of the box without worrying too much.

You cannot force Apple or Microsoft to solve a problem that does not exist.

This comes back to the question of freedom & responsibility? Do you want freedom from mega corporations tracking you? Use Linux.

Do you want mega corporations to collect telemetry and records user behavior, but will give you a readymade OS that you could start with without learning much about it? Use Apple or Microsoft. But you do realize that Apple would need to collect user data to design a system that.

Most people do not want responsibility that comes with freedom. So, they choose to go with having less freedom and less responsibility. 

It is not like alternative solutions does not exist in the market. It does an its free. Just that it does not interests people.

 

[thenondualtankie]

Can't we just revolt if our big tech overlords aren't sharing the fruits of AI?

Also, competition drives the cost of things to zero when there's no labor involved. If everything is automated, nothing is profitable, as long as there are competing entities doing the automation.

[Bobby_2021]

Also note that all these advancements in AI would not have been possible without "stealing" the data.

If they can steal my data and make something as incredible as an powerful LLM, then I support stealing those data. 

How incredible it would be if could make use of code written by other people in my own work? That is the magic of capitalism.

Data is collected to improve that service. IF you do not want that, use cheaper stuff that exists, that do not steal your data. It is out there. No one is forcing you to give up your data. Even if 10% more people were concerned with their privacy than now, then we would have been living in a much different world. Open-source ecosystem would have made even more wonderful software you all can make use of.

But people do not care about privacy or transparency. So the capitalistic free market gives them exactly that.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The whole problem lies when govt increases the barrier of entry for small businesses. That is the thing that we should be really scared of. 

And avoid obvious market manipulation like stock buybacks & insider trading. ALl of these are problems with the government, not with capitalism.

[LSD-Rumi]

@Leo Gura Does this apply to someone like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs for example? And How about Elon Musk?

[Leo Gura]

6 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Consent does not matter anyway since most people simply do not care. 

And most people will not care that they are slowly enslaved.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, LSD-Rumi said:

@Leo Gura Does this apply to someone like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs for example? And How about Elon Musk?

All these people did nasty things to exploit someone.

[Buck Edwards]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

All these people did nasty things to exploit someone.

Like?