"The two AI products he launched last year—language bot ChatGPT and its image-based counterpart Dall-E—have terrified and amazed the public by producing novels and art as good as some man-made equivalents."
No links to any examples of this (IMO, vague and extremely dubious) claim. Can anyone else provide some?
Yo, can we get these on the main feed where we can listen to them? It's super annoying to have to click interview and then not be able to listen to them. Thank you
Thanks for this insight into the makers vs the doomers. Directionally, I’m much more a fan of the makers, but not so much the accelerator part. Moving fast breaks things by creating unintended consequences. That’s what doomers have wrought. They believe it’s all going to end anyway so what the hell. It’s a self-fulfilling vicious cycle. I hope makers will take time to think things through and anticipate. Thats how to create value worth paying for. The return on the investment of time to anticipate is a virtuous cycle that’s inherently resilient.
So, e/accers have claimed the exponential curve as the emblem on their flag of "righteous change." There have been many examples in history of change documented in an exponential curve and they are *not* all good. Pandemic infection rates and deaths regularly follow an exponential growth curve (e.g. Covid-19). The nuclear chain reaction in an atomic bomb is represented as an exponential growth curve. Ponzi schemes can be illustrated in an exponential growth curve -- just to name a few.
For years, Silicon Valley has adopted mission statements that frame change as being always good -- ridiculous statements like "move fast and break things," or "fake it until you make it," or simply, "disrupt!" (with no care about the aftermath). Silicon Valley has turned change into a religion. To question any change is considered heresy, labeling anyone who does it a Luddite (even though the Luddites were not against technology). For the e/accers, the new fanatics of the religion of change, proclaiming change as always good is not enough. It has to happen exponentially! The e/accers are delusional. Given power, they will lead the world to disaster through their egotistical belief that they can't possibly be wrong.
SOS...same old shit. Hubris always calls in the clothing of the young and innovative and most of them crash and burn. Alarm always calls in the clothing of the older been there and done that. I will just wait and see, if I live that long.
Fundamentally… do you think this one is no different than the past thousand hobgoblins the elite have told us that only THEY can protect us from, or do you think that human ingenuity will continue to be our best protection from ourselves?
While I applaud the enthusiasm and pioneering spirit of the e/accers, I have a hard time seeing how AI can solve societal problems like homelessness, addiction, and violence. These are problems that require human virtues like charity, patience and hope, not computers and algorithms.
Changing weather patterns, changing local climates, eliminating hurricanes and wildfires? This couldn’t possibly lead to unintended consequences! My lord, I don’t know what is worse; that this is possible or that some people think it’s a good idea.
I'm more inclined to trust the e/acc folks than Biden, Trump or Congress. The political class are more interested in preserving the status quo, especially if it benefits their donors. If AI is destined to kill us all, it will likely do so regardless of the attempts by governments to control it.
I trust markets to sort this out waaay more than politicized regulators who often receive campaign contributions from incumbent tech companies. I'm a long time stakeholder in both Apple and Google so I understand the moats they attempt to build around their great businesses, but the future should require their disruption.
MIND BOGGLING, amazing wealth of knowledge. I can't quite fully understand it yet, welcome discussions to make this world a better place.
My instinct of course is to take Elon Musk's side because he has proven himself to be sincere about betterment in humanity. And has taken the hits for it!
Well done Julia! This is a good piece of writing
"The two AI products he launched last year—language bot ChatGPT and its image-based counterpart Dall-E—have terrified and amazed the public by producing novels and art as good as some man-made equivalents."
No links to any examples of this (IMO, vague and extremely dubious) claim. Can anyone else provide some?
Yo, can we get these on the main feed where we can listen to them? It's super annoying to have to click interview and then not be able to listen to them. Thank you
The recent interview between Joe Rogan and Sam Altman was absolutely fascinating! It helped me understand AI better and feel more hopeful about its potential for the world. Well worth a listen. https://open.spotify.com/episode/66edV3LAbUXa26HG1ZQaKB?si=3PBNdyMmQ2mjYEA3FGQvEA
Thanks for this insight into the makers vs the doomers. Directionally, I’m much more a fan of the makers, but not so much the accelerator part. Moving fast breaks things by creating unintended consequences. That’s what doomers have wrought. They believe it’s all going to end anyway so what the hell. It’s a self-fulfilling vicious cycle. I hope makers will take time to think things through and anticipate. Thats how to create value worth paying for. The return on the investment of time to anticipate is a virtuous cycle that’s inherently resilient.
So, e/accers have claimed the exponential curve as the emblem on their flag of "righteous change." There have been many examples in history of change documented in an exponential curve and they are *not* all good. Pandemic infection rates and deaths regularly follow an exponential growth curve (e.g. Covid-19). The nuclear chain reaction in an atomic bomb is represented as an exponential growth curve. Ponzi schemes can be illustrated in an exponential growth curve -- just to name a few.
For years, Silicon Valley has adopted mission statements that frame change as being always good -- ridiculous statements like "move fast and break things," or "fake it until you make it," or simply, "disrupt!" (with no care about the aftermath). Silicon Valley has turned change into a religion. To question any change is considered heresy, labeling anyone who does it a Luddite (even though the Luddites were not against technology). For the e/accers, the new fanatics of the religion of change, proclaiming change as always good is not enough. It has to happen exponentially! The e/accers are delusional. Given power, they will lead the world to disaster through their egotistical belief that they can't possibly be wrong.
SOS...same old shit. Hubris always calls in the clothing of the young and innovative and most of them crash and burn. Alarm always calls in the clothing of the older been there and done that. I will just wait and see, if I live that long.
I shamefully admit I feel betwixt and befuddled. I move from somebody stop them to you go, guy!
Fundamentally… do you think this one is no different than the past thousand hobgoblins the elite have told us that only THEY can protect us from, or do you think that human ingenuity will continue to be our best protection from ourselves?
The late Percy Saltzman, Canada's first television meteorologist, if man could control the weather he would kill mankind.
While I applaud the enthusiasm and pioneering spirit of the e/accers, I have a hard time seeing how AI can solve societal problems like homelessness, addiction, and violence. These are problems that require human virtues like charity, patience and hope, not computers and algorithms.
Changing weather patterns, changing local climates, eliminating hurricanes and wildfires? This couldn’t possibly lead to unintended consequences! My lord, I don’t know what is worse; that this is possible or that some people think it’s a good idea.
I'm more inclined to trust the e/acc folks than Biden, Trump or Congress. The political class are more interested in preserving the status quo, especially if it benefits their donors. If AI is destined to kill us all, it will likely do so regardless of the attempts by governments to control it.
I trust markets to sort this out waaay more than politicized regulators who often receive campaign contributions from incumbent tech companies. I'm a long time stakeholder in both Apple and Google so I understand the moats they attempt to build around their great businesses, but the future should require their disruption.
Pirate Wires recently hosted Beff Jezos on their weekly podcast. It is very much worth a watch/listen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_t7gCOoSZSk
And on their Substack, PW published yesterday a much better homage to El Segundo.
https://www.piratewires.com/p/thank-god-for-el-segundo
MIND BOGGLING, amazing wealth of knowledge. I can't quite fully understand it yet, welcome discussions to make this world a better place.
My instinct of course is to take Elon Musk's side because he has proven himself to be sincere about betterment in humanity. And has taken the hits for it!