haungack

joined 3 days ago
[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

OP just fyi but i think that somehow reducing the human population by 99.99%, leaving around a million or so, would not be the worst thing ever for hardcore environmentalism.

So however way society collapsed or for whatever reason, the ensueing starvation of billions due to collapsing fertilizer and fuel supply chains, is the fantasy.

spoiler/s
spoiler spoiler kinda :::

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I find it fascinating how oblivious people pretend to be about what our natural social hierarchies are, making fringe speculations ranging from proto-capitalism, over alpha male fantasies, to proto-communism.

Maybe it's too obvious, or too boring, but it's families. Incidentally, happens to be the same for actual, natural packs of wolves.

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

And what happens when a bubble bursts? Did the internet die when the dotcom bubble burst, or is that just when it really started to get going?

I share most of your sentiments against AI, but a bubble popping won't make it go away, and it won't even rectify it to be more to people's likings (i doubt it). It takes more than just waiting around to accomplish that.

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Harm per presence is actually looking pretty darn good compared to cars, not to mention other humans. And if looking at certain nations and cultures where "strays" are historically not seen as such, but as communal protectors, where people are culturally aware of how to treat and coexist with them, they're often if not widely regarded as a major net-benefit.

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

why should we value their thoughts and opinions about how it’s used?

because they know shit

The Manhattan project scientists were writing hand wringing op-eds; making policy suggestions; and lobbing the government basically until they died. It didn’t amount to much.

touché

I'm not really asking for change, and to be totally honest, i'm just whining about something that i know i can't change.

edit: the deleted reply was identical, misclicks

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

The main challenge is the knowledge of software vulnerabilities. AI either has it or it doesn't. It will not be for some time, and i've given up trying to make precise estimates, before AI will be able to discover new software vulnerabilities in a way that is efficient (can run on IOT devices) and is easily obscured. Assuming current compute demands, one could try to come up with a rough estimate by extrapolating moore's law (which itself has become iffy).

BOINC-style distributed AI is another thing that people are working on, and one can at least imagine existing botnets maybe converting into distributed malicious AI platforms in foreseeable future?

Don't quote me on this.

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (6 children)

You're being quite presumptuous and also directly contradicting some of what i wrote. Would you say "in 999999 out of 1000000 scenarios will surely harm us" sounds sci-fi utopia? Besides, the actual scifi fantasies that i did reference i stated as other people's inspirations (not mine), some of whom are much smarter and more accoplished than the entirety of lemmy combined, to say nothing of just you or me.

AI doesn’t have “its own sake.”

A literal rock has its own sake. You're thinly veiling vibes and outrage in pure rhetoric and a misleading semblance of rationality.

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago

Unpopped kernels are my favorite

i went through much effort trying to come up with a way to not pop pocorn, so that i get maximal unpopped, but nicely toasted, kernels.

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 days ago

I don't know if the current AI phase is a bubble, but i agree with you that if it were a bubble and burst, it wouldn't somehow stop or end AI, but cause a new wave of innovation instead.

I've seen many AI opponents imply otherwise. When the dotcom bubble burst, the internet didn't exactly die.

[–] haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

When workers are exhausted and strapped for time they become politically inert and easier to predict/control (because they are fucking tired).

I would also add: Engineered financial struggle also gives the illusion of instability, lowering the average will to take a revolutionary risk. And of course, besides the stability/crowd control aspect, people also just work harder for mainly other people's riches.

As a concrete example of the "life is hard, we're practically always on the brink of collapse"-lie: There was major hysteria in Germany about the apocalypse that would totally ensue if Russian gas imports were suspended. That continued on until the gas pipelines were literally blown up (thanks, to whoever that was), and gas imports ceased for different reasons anyways.

Nothing came of it. Minor dents here and there, which were quickly hammered out. The rich so blinded by numbers, that's what they stirred all the drama and made all the fuss about, manipulating the entire nation and its gullible/corruptible politicians. Germany didn't turn of Russian gas voluntarily, that decision had to be made for Germany by others, and it's embarassing.

I wouldn't say this (mass manipulation and oppression) is even a conspiracy theory. The main reason i just switched platforms to lemmy, and likewise for other social media apps, is algorithmic control/censorship. Algorithmic cursing of anything that is political, deemed "inciting", or even just "negative" as an AI would define it. "Advertizability" is an easy excuse for censorship. Remember the web chaos in the 2010s? People were raising massive, nationwide protests over copyright minutia. We don't have that anymore, even though now we've got much better reasons to protest. I digress - my point is that even our western nations aren't strangers to mass manipulation and oppression, at all.

view more: ‹ prev next ›