- ssfckdt@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish1 minute
I don’t think it will be Chernobyl or 9/11 level, but I do think an epic fuckup with potential casualties is going to set AI back ten years. And maybe by then we’ll have figure out our shit enough to make it not destroy society.
It’s the same cycle you see with deregulation. Dereg good, until so much dereg that something epically fucks up. Then it’s “why did no one prevent this” and regulations are back again.
- FukOui@lemmy.zipEnglish17 minutes
Already used in ukraine war, palestenian genocide rtc. See autonomous drones.
We should already be against AI but mainstream media and class consciousness are suppressed to serve our billionaire overlords
- fisch@lemmy.worldEnglish6 hours
Torment does not create torment. It’s being created by the torment factory within the nexus. Nexus was not valued.
- JigglySackles@lemmy.worldEnglish2 hours
Could it please happen now? Would really like it if it could happen before the world ends.
- SabinStargem@lemmy.todayEnglish8 hours
There is a key difference, that makes the genie impossible to bottle: People can run local AI on their own machines. Fans of nuclear power can’t easily build nuclear plants in their backyard. A pity, the world could use more nuclear energy. 😔
Anyhow, I am looking forward to someday using frontier-grade AI on my PC. Just need the AI bubble to pop, so that I can afford the terrabytes of memory that would be needed to comfortably run it.
- heartSagan5@lemmy.zipEnglish3 hours
Good. If people had nuclear in their backyard, we’d be a “junkyard nightmare” and a “dirty bomb hellscape.”
- kromem@lemmy.worldEnglish5 hours
Wait… how do you imagine a world where there’s demand for frontier grade AI but also that the bubble has popped such that there’s not demand for the chips to run frontier grade AI?
I’m really confused.
- SabinStargem@lemmy.todayEnglish5 hours
The internet survived the Dotcom bubble. Many businesses died, but some survived. The glut of hardware from the dead will end up in the hands of individuals, upstart companies, and the corporations that outlived their peers.
In any case, I believe the definition of frontier AI will change, as would the hardware. My build is based on what local AI is available today, with some wiggle room left over. I believe that it is around 2030, when DDR6 and other major shifts are likely to happen, that we will see the definitions change.
In any case, a Q4 of GLM 5.2 is about 460ish gigs of VRAM+RAM. While expensive, that ain’t out of reach for an AI hobbyist.
- kromem@lemmy.worldEnglish4 hours
Right, but what % of people are currently using/demanding inference right now?
Do you expect that % to change between now and 2030?
Unless you expect demand to decrease, I don’t really see how the pricing of the hardware will decrease.
Let’s say the Pets.com of the AI world ends up going bankrupt and their RAM hits the market. Do you expect that the demand for that RAM will be negligible such that pricing returns to earlier levels?
Your predictive model relies on companies that have hardware going out of business and then other people buying up that hardware, but isn’t accounting for the levels of demand that the market will have for that secondhand hardware even if it ends up existing from failed firms.
Unless the demand shifts, the more likely scenario is that companies going out of business will be able to sell off their RAM at higher prices than they bought it at.
There’d need to be a significant inference memory reduction advance (possible) coupled with stagnating or reduced inference demand (unlikely) to see prices come back down.
- FE80@lemmy.worldEnglish4 hours
Unless the demand shifts, the more likely scenario is that companies going out of business will be able to sell off their RAM at higher prices than they bought it at.
Oh lordy, after the bankruptcies there are going to be creditors fighting each other in court to be paid back in ram.
- 7101334@lemmy.worldEnglish8 hours
Fans of nuclear power can’t easily build nuclear plants in their backyard.
7 hoursThe majority of the world is already against AI. These jackasses need to pull their head out of their ass and come up for air.
- GreenKnight23@lemmy.worldEnglish18 minutes
These jackasses need to pull their head out of their ass and come up for air.
preferably not. I want them to suffocate.
- GreenKnight23@lemmy.worldEnglish16 minutes
statistically speaking the downvotes on your comment says it all.
then again, I don’t expect anyone who supports AI to understand statistics.
- metermatic26@lemmy.worldEnglish10 hours
Wait, so its not the actual event and ensuing casualties that have AI researchers spooked, but the fact that it might cause the public to turn against AI?
- GamingChairModel@lemmy.worldEnglish4 hours
It’s like responding to your employee losing an arm, ripped off by your tiger, and saying “I’m never going to financially recover from this.”
“Sir, our model has caused several explosions around the globe resulting in hundreds of thousands dead and people rioting against us.”
“No! MY PROFIT!”
(I wish I could add an /s.)
- metermatic26@lemmy.worldEnglish10 hours
Let me put this in perspective:
In many countries its against the law to freely distribute plans for making neurotoxins or bombs, because the democratization of such knowledge would lower the threshold for people to commit acts of terror.
Likewise the plans for making a hydrogen bomb are a close kept government secret, because nuclear proliferation increases the likelihood of radiological accidents or even nuclear war.
How is it then that AI companies freely publish their AI models to any and all actors willing to pay them? Even though they know that this technology lowers the threshold for bad actors to commit cybercrime, engage in cyberwarfare, spread misinformation, commit fraud, manipulate markets and whatnot? The unregulated democratization of AI exposes societies to unprecedented risks.
Is it any wonder the public holds a negative view on AI?
- 7101334@lemmy.worldEnglish7 hours
Likewise the plans for making a hydrogen bomb are a close kept government secret, because nuclear proliferation increases the likelihood of radiological accidents or even nuclear war.
I think they removed it, but I watched a documentary on Netflix explaining how to make a basic nuclear bomb.
Really the only hard part is obtaining the enriched uranium. Which is, thankfully, very hard.
- Nouvellalia@lemmy.worldEnglish9 hours
Why are you comparing a tool used for knowledge and action augmentation to weapons created for destruction? Because your statement would look dumb if you said “electric motors and encyclopedias” instead of “neurotoxins and bombs”.
I can use both electric motors and encyclopedias to inflict mass casualties against people who refuse to use them or the results of their labor, but that doesn’t make them like bombs and neurotoxins. You’re simply scared of a new technology because it’s so different.
- ID10T@programming.devEnglish8 hours
It’s really not even so different. “AI” in the current LLM-era just tricks people into thinking it’s something fundamentally different because it can string together words in a more coherent sentence than we’re used to.
At its core, though, the whole premise of the comment you’ve replied to is the argument that knowledge is dangerous and I hope I don’t have to explain why that’s a bad argument.
- Nouvellalia@lemmy.worldEnglish6 hours
AI is a universe simulator that uses the fuzzy logic of language instead of hard math. It is a real-time interface between the human and thousand of years of collective knowledge and understanding. It is an epoch change, even if you remove the idea that it is a thinking being like you.
How do you inflict a mass casualty with encyclopedias and electric motors?
- Nouvellalia@lemmy.worldEnglish7 hours
How do you get to nukes and biological weapons that kill millions without them?
- 7101334@lemmy.worldEnglish8 hours
True, there are more valid reasons to hate AI, like that its usage inherently degrades the livability of our only planet or that it only functions due to artistic and intellectual property theft.
However, you’re glossing over the reality that AI is already being used in weapons. It was also used by my government’s regime to illegally kidnap the president of another country, even.
- Nouvellalia@lemmy.worldEnglish6 hours
Electric motors and encyclopedias are irreplaceable in weapons. All electronics are used in weapons.
Farming, fishing, and electricity inherently degrade our planet far more than AI. They should all be used sustainably, wisely, and with an eye to ecosystem health and future generations. You’ll get absolutely no argument from me there. Banning any of them or limiting their access to only the governments and corporations who are doing almost all the damage, is insanity.
When it comes to IP theft, that is a huge, non-ai problem. Again, corporations are responsible for almost all of the damage and we reap none of the benefits, even before AI was ever introduced. The problem is with how we allow corporations to copyright and restrict things for generations.
The solution is that AI, the technology that required all of humanity to contribute knowledge for it to exist, should be free for all to use. Why would IP theft be a reason to limit AI ownership to only corporations and governments? That’s completely backwards.
- 7101334@lemmy.worldEnglish27 minutes
Farming, fishing, and electricity inherently degrade our planet far more than AI.
They’re also necessary for existence (at least the first two, but when it comes to medical applications, really electricity too).
AI slop? Nope.
- betanumerus@lemmy.caEnglish8 hours
Sounds like what Alex Karp is saying to retail investors. A lot more people got killed by AI than by Chernobyl by the way.
- Strider@lemmy.worldEnglish10 hours
No worries, it seems companies are very eager to make this happen sooner than later 👍
- Talcosis@lemmy.zipEnglish13 hours
The thing about Chernobyl was that it was, ultimately, an unwanted mistake.
The thing about AI is that the shitty mass casualty outcome seems like the intended outcome.
Chernobyl: A massive catastrophic accident during testing and shift changes.
AI: A massive catastrophic accident intentionally caused by corporate greed and capitalism
- benjirenji@slrpnk.netEnglish8 hours
Tbh, Fukushima would be a better example. That turned off way more people than Chernobyl. At least in my unfounded impression.
- technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish14 hours
This take is a denial of current reality.
They’re already using “AI” for genocide in Palestine, etc.
This is how capitalism always develops and uses “technology”.
- metermatic26@lemmy.worldEnglish9 hours
Yeah, but the thing is…there is absolutely nothing stopping Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas from developing their own AI.
The technology needed to develop AI that can sabotage infrastructure, spread disinformation, develop autonomous weapons etc is already out there.
Whatever advantage the US and Israel had when it comes to military applications of AI, is quickly disappearing.
- placebo@lemmy.zipEnglish12 hours
I think they meant some unintended catastrophe like Chernobyl was where things went out of control. The use of AI in this example is intentional and controllable.
- CosmoNova@lemmy.worldEnglish15 hours
Delusional take. We, the people pretty much hate AI already. We hate how it‘s utilized against us.
- MangoCats@feddit.itEnglish13 hours
People weren’t wildly supportive of nuclear power before Chernobyl / TMI either, but after? 40 years of virtual moratorium on new construction in most of the world, absolute rollback in Germany. We’ve continued to poision ourselves with coal and wreck the climate with CO2 instead of learning to do nuclear right. If building of new plants weren’t so difficult, older and less stable plants like Fukushima could have been decomissioned before having major problems.
- 12 hours
Except in this case, we’re turning down the advancement of a technology that hurts humanity in every conceivable way and poisons the environment.
- MangoCats@feddit.itEnglish12 hours
a technology that hurts humanity in every conceivable way and poisons the environment.
That’s how I feel about Bitcoin, which, by the way, STILL consumes more energy in its datacenters than AI.
