I have avoided AI (LLMS) because it didn't seem nearly useful enough to warrant supporting these tech assholes. Is there anyway to use it locally on a normal device (16 Gb ram, 8 year old Geforce graphics, etc?). Can I just slow it down and get it to work locally?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 22 points 6 days ago (5 children)

While I respect your cynicism and it's fully justified, in fact they can do useful and interesting things for individuals too. They must be used cautiously, and with understanding of their limitations and a realistic appreciation for their capabilities. Large neural networks like this are in a fundamental sense statistical models. I have pointed out in the past that many of the large general-purpose "assistant" models that have been trained on what amounts to very close to the entire corpus of knowledge and information contained in libraries and on the internet. Regardless of why they were trained, and whether that was done ethically (it wasn't) the fact is these models now exist, and we have access to many of them, and they contain statistical models of what I will refer to as the vast majority of human knowledge to-date.

If you can't imagine that there are ways that statistical information could be valuable, you are either incredibly lacking in creativity or simply being ignorant and myopic as far as I'm concerned.

As an analogy, national and sociological demographics and census data is abbreviated and summarized statistics much like neural networks. It cannot in many cases correctly and confidently predict any particular outcome. But that doesn't mean it's not useful or meaningful. It is not a complete and accurate listing of every human's thoughts, feelings, and preferences, and most honest people would not imagine it is. If you ask it for that, you are doing it wrong, or you are selling something. Same with generative AI models. The fact that some people (including huge companies) misuse it does not mean that such statistics are evil and we should throw it away.

Using it for intelligent, thoughtful purposes is a form of rebellion and I believe it is important that we continue to have access to these technologies. They are not intelligent, and they are not even artificial. They are loosely curated distillations of human knowledge. That is very powerful, it is a very fascinating and practically useful tool. It is not magic, it is not a real boy, it does not have feelings or purpose, it is a tool. It is being used for purposes, but you have the power to use it for purposes too, and those should be your own purposes, not what purposes companies dictate to you. Engage your brain and learn how and when to use it, don't use it to replace your brain, it's not what it's being sold as, but it is a very clever and interesting technology.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 days ago (4 children)

    It is so refreshing to see a well-formed opinion on the character, quality, and appropriate use of AI. I would like to thank you for your service.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago (3 children)

    I appreciate your support. Trying to be nuanced and realistic and find common ground on a topic that is so polarizing, and frankly potentially existential, is difficult. We live in a scary world right now for a lot of different reasons, and people are scared (of being left behind, of having their work stolen, of having their humanity stolen), and I don't blame them. These are valid and justifiable concerns that deserve serious consideration and serious discussion. Which, in a lot of cases, they're unfortunately not getting.

    If I were running the show, I would do things a lot differently. But I'm not running the show, and I don't think the people running this show have even the vaguest interest in listening to me or probably pretty much anyone, so all I can do is try to educate and provide advice, which is free, while I too worry if AI is going to take my job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (2 children)

    I think I'm (unfortunately) starting to really understand what Frank Herbert meant when he wrote, "Fear is the mind killer." It's very disheartening to see legitimate concerns snowball into lemming-like behavior.

    When in the throws of despair or grieving for a society in decline I'd typically appeal to the classic MiB quote:

    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

    But as the years go by it's becoming increasingly difficult to find solace there — mostly because my experience is showing me that it's simply no longer true. I feel like I'm living in a world where everyone read Bonhoeffer’s Theory of Stupidity and most people responded with, "Where do I sign?"

    I've observed this behavior from both doomers and AI evangelists.

    However, in the effort of full-disclosure, I must admit that I am a staunch accelerationist. That's because, when viewed from a cosmological perspective, the only rational way to describe the last few hundred years of human development would be as an explosion, and I firmly believe the only path out is forward. Standing against the tide of technological progress at this point would be akin to standing against a blast wave.

    That's really damn scary.

    The real sticking point seems to be that increased knowledge does not alleviate the existential dread. On the contrary, in many ways it exacerbates the mortal fear. Knowledge without power or prescience is impotent. Not that it would make a difference anyway.

    If we had developed the concept of The Great Filter before the steam engine, would the world have responded to Watt's machine in the same way it's responding to Dario's now? And would that have even made a lick of difference?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    Very interesting commentary. I get what you're saying, and I agree. I think there's something similarly paradoxical to Dunning-Kruger going on with these kind of existential concerns, too, and I think that is probably reflected in your accelerationist position. We can also see it in climate change for example, the people who actually understand it and study it are less likely to find or see anything that can actually stop or reverse it, besides the one thing that it's increasingly clear we won't do: drastically cut emissions. And the deeper you understand the actual threat and the realistic psychology around it the more overwhelming and hopeless it seems, and the less it feels worthwhile to even try to stop it.

    By the time all the less-understanding, less-pessimistic people start to actually see the unavoidable long-term consequences and trends of climate change, we're going to be so far beyond having any sort of handle on it to control it, the only remaining hope is for a miracle, no matter how improbable, and if you have no hope of stopping it, then pinning your hopes on the miracle and trying to get as far ahead as you can until and unless that happens is (sadly) actually the rational choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

    Yeah, I think you've nailed it.

    There's no stopping the Holocene extinction. Our only hope as a species is to try to survive it and to position ourselves so that we end up in the best-possible position on the other side. I see continued, rapid technological progress (including AI development) as the most realistic means to accomplishing these ends.

    I don't think Ishmael was wrong, I just think the viewpoint isn't realistically actionable.

  • source
  • parent