Technology

You already don't have social permission to do what you are doing, and that hasn't stopped you. The world is bigger than the 10 people around your board's table.

Isn't there plenty of research it's the opposite of a cognitive amplifier, people get cognitively lazy using ai.

He could set an example by replacing himself with AI

Quick! Jam it into toasters! Put LLMs into keyboards so they rewrite everything inputted! AI-powered screwdrivers!

Funny seeing this post during a big Microsoft outage lmao

That's not how technology is supposed to work.

The only thing it produces is heat

Yeah, I'm already there.

"But we're rendering naked children as fast as we can"

Just investing in better tech instead of stacking GPUs might suffice too

Its a admission that it isn't doing anything useful.

It would be more useful to replace CEOs with AI. Or maybe even my dog.

Honestly, this is the most reasonable take I have heard from tech bros on ai so far... Use it for something useful and stop using it for garbage!

Ai has a million great uses that could make so many things so much easier, but instead we are building AI to undress women on twitter

We're not replacing workers fast enough.

-This jackass, essentially.

You already have.

Isn't it alleged that China goes for specific use cases and not general intelligence?

Maybe that's the way to go and not the gamble that the US and western companies are doing.

Hey Nafella, why Don't you go outside and play hide and go fuck yourself. We're getting a huge cold snap tonight so it's the perfect time for you to go blast hot air someplace useful.

AI can absolutely be useful. But it’s been wildly oversold and the actual beneficial use cases are not nearly as profitable as the marketing around it

I hope all parties responsible for this garbage, including Microsoft will pay a huge price in the end. Fuck all these morons.

Stop shilling for these corporate assholes or you will own nothing and will be forced to be happy.

I work in AI and the only obvious profit is the ability to fire workers. Which they need to rehire after some months, but lowering wages. It is indeed a powerful tool, but tools are not driving profits. They are a cost. Unless you run a disinformation botnet, scamming websites, or porn. It is too unpredictable to really automatize software creation ( fuzzy is the term, we somehow mitigate with stochastic approach ). Probably movie industry is also cutting costs, but not sure.

AI is the way capital is trying to acquire skills cutting off the skilled.

Have to say though that having an interfacd that understands natural language opens so many possibilities. Which could really democratize access to tech, but they are so niche that they would never really drive profit.

AI isn't at all reliable.

Worse, it has a uniform distribution of failures in the domain of seriousness of consequences - i.e. it's just as likely to make small mistakes with miniscule consequences as major mistakes with deadly consequences - which is worse than even the most junior of professionals.

(This is why, for example, an LLM can advise a person with suicidal ideas to kill themselves)

Then on top of this, it will simply not learn: if it makes a major deadly mistake today and you try to correct it, it's just as likely to make a major deadly mistake tomorrow as it would be if you didn't try to correct it. Even if you have access to actually adjust the model itself, correcting one kind of mistake just moves the problem around and is akin to trying to stop the tide on a beach with a sand wall - the only way to succeed is to have a sand wall for the whole beach, by which point it's in practice not a beach anymore.

You can compensate for this by having human oversight on the AI, but at that point you're just back to having to pay humans for the work being done, so now instead of having to the cost of a human to do the work, you have the cost of the AI to do the work + the cost of the human to check the work of the AI and the human has to check the entirety of the work just to make sure since problems can pop-up anywere, take and form and, worse, unlike a human the AI work is not consistent so errors are unpredictable, plus the AI will never improve and it will never include the kinds of improvements that humans doing the same work will over time discover in order to make later work or other elements of the work be easier to do (i.e. how increase experience means you learn to do little things to make your work and even the work of others easier).

This seriously limits the use of AI to things were the consequences of failure can never be very bad (and if you also include businesses, "not very bad" includes things like "not significantly damage client relations" which is much broader than merely "not be life threathening", which is why, for example, Lawyers using AI to produce legal documents are getting into trouble as the AI quotes made up precedents), so mostly entertainment and situations were the AI alerts humans for a potential situation found within a massive dataset and if the AI fails to spot it, it's alright and if the AI incorrectly spots something that isn't there the subsequent human validation can dismiss it as a false positive (so for example, face recognition in video streams for the purpose of general surveillance, were humans watching those video streams are just or more likely to miss it and an AI alert just results in a human checking it, or scientific research were one tries to find unknown relations in massive datasets)

So AI is a nice new technological tool in a big toolbox, not a technological and business revolution justifying the stock market valuations around it, investment money sunk into it or the huge amount of resources (such as electricity) used by it.

Specifically for Microsoft, there doesn't really seem to be any area were MS' core business value for customers gains from adding AI, in which case this "AI everywhere" strategy in Microsoft is an incredibly shit business choice that just burns money and damages brand value.

do something useful

Skynet or China wins is the goal. It's useful to US empire to do Palantir surveilllance for "Patriotic subservience to Israel first agenda". Robocops instead of ICE officers provides useful increase in bravery to apply fascism. We must race China in robots, without any manufacturing aptitude, or power capacity, with only extortionist oligarch power expansion options, under an oligarchist, corporatist, zionist supremacist fascism to concentrate oligarchy and fascism further, so as to force China to keep up and "everyone" (important) makes money playing the game of winning is which side gets destroyed more.

So, as long as we view US empire as useful, Skynet is very useful. We can pretend that some other apps will be useful (Nadela is saying "just buy a PC and learn excel to be useful" as main point), but all of big tech is courting US government for big datacenter use, and political unanimity for war on China, means there is no other "useful" application required.

The most important social permission for AI, is the permission to fund Skynet, and the permission for warmongering military budget and attitude. An Israel/Oligarchist first rulership means there is never any money for any other purpose than that supremacism. The destination of collapse is a consequence only for the little people. Wealth "creation" (pillaging) in the journey, and escape from consequences of collapse.

Literally burning the planet with power demand from data centers but not even knowing what it could possibly be good for?

That's eco-terrorism for lack of a better word.

Fuck you.

The only thing I use AI for right now is spouting nonsense at it for a joke. For example I would ask 'why didn't (insert well known figure here) buy me lunch?' Or 'I farted and they cleared out a 10 block radius and called in a chemical weapons cleanup crew, is this normal?'

Shit like that.

"bend the productivity curve" is such a beautiful way to say that they are running out of ideas on how to sell that damn thing.

It basically went from :

• it's going to change EVERYTHING! Humanity as we know it is a thing of the past!

... to "bend the productivity curve". It's not how it "radically increase productivity" no it's a lot more subtle than that, to the point that it can actually bend that curve down. What a shit show.

Eeh didn't you pay attention in economy 101? If you generate more supply than demand that's a you problem. The free market will take care.

Ah. Is THAT why they're trying to shove it into everything.