GaMEChld

But not really a NEW problem. We knew LLM's are trained on aggregate human data. We know aggregate human data is fundamentally flawed, inconsistent, unreliable, etc.

Like was there a point at which people just decided, nah AI is just plain accurate? Or is that just what morons always thought despite the permanent warnings plastered everywhere saying THIS AI CAN MAKE MISTAKES, CHECK EVERYTHING!

Yeah, I just lean into it. Try and count lol! Or maybe it could be turned into a drinking game!

I don't see this as a problem, rather, an opportunity to study information & disinformation propogation.

Love the vibe, but not making enough bad decisions to be truly Janeway.

Yeah, he's another good example. Funny thing is he and Lisa are related. That's a hell of a legacy cooking in that family tree.

I'm not necessarily saying they need to be ABLE to do all the jobs, but I think it's probably a good recipe for success for the CEO to understand the importance of each role in a company. And that said, an Engineer type CEO is probably a boon to companies who are in the business of engineering solutions.

Sure sure, though I think at that point the semantics of the word "direct" is probably something we would discuss and find common ground at. By direct I simply mean whatever the shortest VIABLE route is, which may end up being quite circuitous.

I think a good CEO should strive to understand as much of a business he runs as possible. But the larger the company the more I find that it's common that the CEO actually is NOT skilled in the fields most integral to the company's success.

AMD has Lisa Su, but that seems like an exception more than a rule.

Ah... So if I'm reading you right, you're saying:

Yes, no system currently accounts for what we NEED it to do. So the most DIRECT solution would be to create a new movement, a new SYSTEM of people, control, and influence that transcends existing abstractions like nationalities, race, culture, and have this ontologically encompassing system implement that change from its larger frame of reference.

I like that. I hadn't considered that approach and it's probably right on the money. I think the first step is recognition of the issue and the need for such a movement. As such... Have you thought about names?

Something you would call such an endeavor, or movement, or coalition. Something that would be instantly recognizable as to what the goal or at least spirit or attitude behind it would be? Probably seems like a silly thing to fixate on this early, but sometimes the right name is a powerful tool.

Well you got to work ontologically. A nation is a system with existing controls. And national control is already dicey at best. Implementing a direct solution at the international level would require a system that to my knowledge doesn't even exists. We treat the UN like an optional club not a world government.

Sure, you right, I didn't mean to imply you need to be a member of a particular community to think there's a logical point being made. Just meant to point out that there are interesting points being made scattered in every viewpoint.

I guess my goal was to kind of show that all these groups at war with one another are kind of talking past each other without really communicating.

And then I see them railing into the void about it as if that's an attempt at communication, meanwhile those people don't realize there are just as many people answering, but everyone is in echo chambers so the algorithm isn't going to spoon feed it to them.

They'd actively have to be looking for the answer in places that make them uncomfortable.

He's a madman with a box! Gotta love him.