116
The zero-days are numbered | The Mozilla Blog (blog.mozilla.org)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 6 months ago (8 children)

No? Things just will exist once they are discovered. Once nuclear warheads were discovered, there was no going back. Once the internet was established, it was going to be around. Same goes for a million other things. And now it applies to AI as well. Even if every big tech fascist stopped making AI, it is still going to be around, and it will be used maliciously. Our best bet is to use it defensibly before it can be used against us.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    principled technologists would of course say that the guillotine and beheadings are also technological inevitabilities, so why resist?

    I think the difference here is, at least we can use the tech I mentioned defensively. However, using genAI and LLMs is always adding to Jensen Huangs bottom line only, and its a loss to everyone else. You don't happen to be a direct relative? Because otherwise you must feel really ridiculous to do free marketing for him

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Comparing AI to the guillotine is absurd. The guillotine and beheadings would literally only impact 1 single industry, and no other.

    At one point adding electricity meant adding to the bottom line of Thomas Edison and Edison Illuminating Company. Why spend all the money and infrastructure when you are just going to get light when candles work fine? Not to mention how dangerous and ugly electric poles are. Who wants those hovering over their head??

    People literally fought electricity because they were looking too close. If you take a step back, you know when something is a big deal based on what potential impacts it could have on a variety of industries. Same with the internet. People saw the potential, and corporations saw the money. There was a bubble, the bubble popped, and the real potential was left behind. AI bubble will pop at some point, and the genuine application of AI will be left behind and whether we want it to or not, will change the world. The technology exists, and pandoras box has been opened.

    This is not a matter of faster beheadings, this is a matter of a conversational pocket expert with immediate response times at any time of day. The technology will only get better, it will only get more efficient. Nvidia will not hold their power forever. You can separate the technology from the corporations profiting and recognize what will happen.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Let's see how wrong your explanation of LLMs is: wrong: -conversational: it only generates the most statistically likely text string to follow. -povcet expert: LLMs have no expertise, it can only regurgitate text strings that are most likely, based on stealing the creative and scientific output of actual experts: humans What isn't wrong is "real time responses", as long as LLM providers decide they provide that, because people using their shitty statistical parrot is costing them their bottom line.

    Anyways, you read like a giant AI-Booster. Did your LLM-Mother write this for you? You can't do Werkimmanenzanalyse on technology! Death of the author cannot apply to actual, society affecting changes. But it's ok, I can just block you for your "Mein AI-Kampf" screed here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    it only generates the most statistically likely text string to follow

    Sure, but if that looks identical to what an ectual expert would say, is there really a difference?

    LLMs have no expertise, it can only regurgitate text strings that are most likely, based on stealing the creative and scientific output of actual experts

    I do agree there is a problem eith AI companies using copyrighted works for training, but couldn't you say the same thing about humans? If I read a book and tell someone else what I learned from that book, did I steal that information? If I pirated the book, yes. If I bought the book, then most people woulf say no.

    as long as LLM providers decide they provide that

    You say this as if we cant self host AI models. The companies don't matter given this fact

    Anyways, you read like a giant AI-Booster

    I can separate greedy tech corporations from the development of new technology. If you denied electricities expansion because the Edison company was greedy, you'd be fighting the existence of electricity in our infrastructure.

    But it’s ok, I can just block you for your “Mein AI-Kampf” screed here.

    That's probably for the best, given how that is an absurd ad hominem that is not related whatsoever to our discussion.

    My main argument is that recognizing AI as a technology is inevitable and revolutionary, is very different from being okay with the AI mega corps, how they are devloping AI, and the environmental impacts of it. AI can be done right, that doesn't mean it is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    Thing is inevitable because... Different thing? Brilliant rhetoric!

    Same goes for cryptocurrency. Same goes for NFTs. Same goes for Metaverse. Hell, why not say same goes for fascism? We must embrace them all, because other thing!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    Cryptocurrency and NFTs are both blockchain. Blockchain by definition have very limited applications. It is hyped because anyone can use it to rug pull others pretending to be an investement. I'm not putting my life savings in AI. Not only that, but how can I use blockchain to help me with my schooling or cooking or thinking through a conplex problem? Metaverse is a product from a single company, not a technology.

    AI as an idea would be more comparable to electricity, internet, smart phones, or other widespread technological advancement. They impact basically every industry, both residential and commercial applications. They are a technology and not specific to a single company (though there are some dominant players). This is more like an advancement in a game that has just been unlocked. There is no re-locking it.

    It is inevitable because even if everyone stopped making more, people would still be using it forever. It is already too good to not use. And it will only get better. That could not be said for your other examples. How is that anything but inevitable?

    I think fighting the tech companies makes sense. But fighting AI as a technology does not make sense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    You're talking exactly the same way about AI that people talked about blockchain a few years ago. Smart Contracts were supposed to revolutionize the universe. All of your "too good to not use" stuff falls in the same camp.

    We might as well keep drilling oil and pumping methane into the air because we started and we shouldn't stop. How else are those data centers going to work? This is progress for some reason.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Blockchain was supposed to be very good for a handful of things. Smart contracts were never going to revolutionize the world, maybe a couple industries. I did not care about block chain technology, it was too specific.

    I can have a personal tutor give me a customized lesson plan for little to no cost. It can look at large amounts of code in little to no time.

    Energy comes from other sources than oil and methane. The fact the US is not prioritizing those alternate methods is a different problem.

    AI will get more efficient, it will get better with less energy and storage. I am not saying the tech bros are not problematic. I am saying their problems do not negate the reality of AI as a technology, and the things it has unlocked.

    Nuclear fusion created both atomic weapons and nuclear energy. Somebody advocating for nuclear energy is not also advocating for more nuclear warheads.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent