this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
245 points (96.2% liked)

Technology

75263 readers
4407 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Xeroxchasechase@lemmy.world 135 points 1 year ago (3 children)

So.... a convention every 4 years?

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ineffective policies for the poor's that has a negligible effect while giant corporations make billions and exacerbate the problem?

[–] Xeroxchasechase@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Sounds same as always. Maybe they'll do it now with a sense of urgency?

[–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 11 points 1 year ago

"We should do something about this" - COPXX

[–] CrayonMaster@midwest.social 84 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I... does the UN think they're handling climate change well and promptly?

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

i mean the global un is pretty good on it; it's just that the larger world powers (especially the us every time they have a conservative who goes backward on it) tend to drag their feet on it

[–] CrayonMaster@midwest.social 6 points 1 year ago

I mean I don't think it's the UN's fault they can't get shit done about climate change, but I still wouldn't use it as a model

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago

Also China doesn't want to fix their shit. So they'll always be a problem.

[–] zaph@sh.itjust.works 70 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So ignore it until it kills us?

[–] lando55@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Haha yeah, I know right cries

[–] twig@lemmy.dbzer0.com 42 points 1 year ago

Sooo high urgency with zero consequence for missing targets?

[–] secret300@lemmy.sdf.org 34 points 1 year ago

So do nothing until it's too late? got it....

[–] SuperFola@programming.dev 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

« creating an AI fund to back projects in these [poorer] nations, establishing AI standards and data-sharing systems, and creating resources such as training to help nations with AI governance. »

So basically burn money and energy on some hallucinating algorithm should be as important as investing in green energy and reducing CO2 levels. That makes sense. Like, yeah, totally onboard. What could go wrong?

[–] jdeath@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

those ai projects will be countering the climate change projects! government at its usual

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

I'd like to ignore it until it goes away too, but I don't think that's an effective strategy for either issue.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 21 points 1 year ago

Given the amount of electricity training and running all these LLMs requires, they might, like cryptocurrency, become drivers of climate change as they cause polluting generators to be built or unmothballed.

[–] irotsoma@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

So none at all...

[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, do nothing for 40 years while it gets progressively worse and allow countries to sign useless feel good things like the Paris Agreement?

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 1 year ago

Each one of these "initiatives" is just another 20 year delay in policy shift.

[–] yournamehere@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago

confused. so nothing will happen, a lot of talk and EU makes a law thats only applied locally if memberstates agree?!?

[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

Bevause they are doing something for the climate?

Ohh okay, so the AI is free to prosper 😁

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago

"AI" is a scam that's contributing to planetary destruction. But it's nowhere near a problem on the same scale. This kind of political theater only fuels the "AI" BS.

[–] JamesStallion@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

IE regulatory capture and soothing bullshit?

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago

So just chill?

[–] john89@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

So... do nothing about it?

[–] UmeU@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

But, let me guess, the billionaires don’t want them to.

[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 1 year ago

Problem resolved itself.. ChatGPT is down.

[–] spyd3r@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And I want to treat the UN like my weekly garbage, and have it hauled away and buried.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, it was so much better when there was a war in Europe every 10 years. Let's go back to that.

[–] spyd3r@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

You can thank NATO and the USA's military for lack of war in Europe, the UN is a joke.

[–] erenkoylu@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

All this AI doomer talk is pointless. AI isn't the problem, humans are.

[–] b161@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Capitalism is the problem. Humans use language, learn and can change behaviour over time. We’re not pre-programmed automatons. “Humans are the problem” is doomer talk.

[–] john89@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Culture, which can change.

[–] dwalin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, we ahould something about those humans! /s

[–] john89@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago

I agree. It's great to have machines do the work we don't want to do so we can do other things with our lives.

We just need to get over this mentality that those who have more deserve more and those who have less deserve less.

[–] johny@feddit.org -1 points 1 year ago

AI: “Put glue in your pizza.” UN: “Ow no! It’s sentient.”

[–] skymtf@lemmy.blahaj.zone -3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Ugh, my issue is AI is a pandas box, we already opened it. Now it’s an argument of regulate technology and banning people from doing certain things on their own devices like running foss LLMs, like if we do that we can also allow bans of end to end encryption

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, but those pandas sure are cute.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

But then they got into that damn box, and now we're doomed.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

my issue is AI is a pandas box, we already opened it.

The big difference is that there is no "AI" box, it's never been opened, and nothing has happened except wasting energy and foolish money.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Upvoted for "Panda's box"...lmao!

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 0 points 1 year ago

It's Pandoras box.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AI doesn't even exist yet. We can't even stop a catastrophe we haven't created yet.

[–] curiousPJ@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Here's the issue I have with your position... AI is such a generic term it's difficult to have a fulfilling conversation using it but in my field a form of AI like machine learning is going to eliminate an entire sector of manufacturing... Boutique precision machined components have been thought as an impenetrable wall against AI but it's basically the same lackluster defense used not long ago about Generative images couldn't produce hands properly... It's not a matter of if but when.

Imo, the catastrophe happens when a successful AI scales. Or perhaps rather how suddenly a successful AI model will bury the existing system into irrelevancy. Boeing and most aerospace manufacturers have a machinist union but none of that will protect against a future where people are no longer necessary.

I don't think it's wrong to have AI eliminate jobs but it shouldn't come without warning. I think it's rather forward looking to be monitoring ongoing AI projects and establish contingencies for folks who will become displaced by it's rapid spread.