DigitalAudio

Honestly, with adequate governance, companies would be required to submit reports on how much labor they're doing using AI, and pay those wages to either their employees or to a sort of "Universal Income" fund to prop up families in poverty. It should be called the AI tax.

The problem is that, with the current state of affairs, asking for regulation from anyone is impossible, and also even if the law were enacted, getting the money from the companies to people who need it instead of the ultra-rich is a major hurdle.

But at the very least, I don't think we should allow companies to simply cut down on human labor without also contributing economically to the employees they cut off.

I don't think anyone is dying to fill in Excel spreadsheets or to write corporate emails. No one is complaining about AI doing those jobs, but about people who lost their livelihoods because of it.

But I don't think that's necessarily a problem that can't be solved. LLM and so on are ultimately simply statistical analysis, and if you refine it and train it enough, it can absolutely summarise at least one paper at the moment. Google's Notebook LM is already capable of it, I just don't think it can quite pull off many of them yet. But the current state of LLMs is not that far off.

I agree with AIs being way over hyped and also just having a general dislike for them due to the way they're being used, the people who gush over them, and the surrounding culture. But I don't think that means we should simply ignore reality altogether. The LLMs from 2 or even 1 year ago are not even comparable to the ones today, and that trend will probably keep going that way for a while. The main issue lies with the ethics of training, copyright, and of course, the replacement of labor in exchange of what amounts to simply a cool tool.

The problem is that you do need to keep training models for this to make sense.

And you always need at least some human editorialization of models, otherwise the model will just say whatever, learn from itself and degrade over time. This cannot be done by other AIs, so for now you still need humans to make sure the AI models are actually getting useful information.

The problem with this, which many have already pointed out, is that it makes AIs just as unreliable as any traditional media. But if you don't oversee their datasets at all and just allow them to learn from everything then they're even more useless, basically just replicating social media bullshit, which nowadays is like at least 60% AI generated anyway.

So yeah, the current model is, not surprisingly, completely unsustainable.

The technology itself is great though. Imagine having an AI that you can easily train at home on 100s of different academic papers, and then run specific analyses or find patterns that would be too big for humans to see at first. Also imagine the impact to the medical field with early cancer detection or virus spreading patterns, or even DNA analysis for certain diseases.

It's also super good if used for creative purposes (not for just generating pictures or music). So for example, AI makes it possible for you to sing a song, then sing the melody for every member of a choir, and fine tune all voices to make them unique. You can be your own choir, making a lot of cool production techniques more accessible.

I believe once the initial hype dies down, we stop seeing AI used as a cheap marketing tactic, and the bubble bursts, the real benefits of AI will become apparent, and hopefully we will learn to live with it without destroying each other lol.

It's quite poetic innit

Isn't it better to have specific stations where you can leave them and pick them back up?

I've seen that model in Bogota, Buenos Aires and Tokyo, and people still absolutely use them all the time and they don't make as much of a mess. It's pretty good.

Isnt Jupiter mostly gas/liquid with only a solid core?

I'd be happy to go back to 2011

That sounds reasonable, yeah. Basically, the reason most people here are boycotting the US US is because they have become untrustworthy and giving money to their corporations is looking more and more like supporting their government as well. But individual 1:1 interactions can be different, obviously.

For physical goods, yeah, but for software and digital stuff, the United States is already too compromised. I wouldn't trust anything developed there.

It's part of a more anti-intellectual movement in the United States, where the arts and humanities are frequently dismissed as "useless" because these people fail to understand that introspection, the creation of culture and the understanding of ourselves is in itself just as fundamental to human happiness and a fulfilling existence as the economy they're so hellbent on defending.

And also Twitter is by far the biggest social network in Japan. There's no chance at all.

It also wasn't an issue with the GB and DS lines, and the Switch notoriously follows the handheld pattern quite closely, so I don't think this will be an issue.