Is chat GPT a danger to humanity?

[weeksy]

It does make you wonder why such a nominally “useless” pursuit (crypto mining) became so popular. Why we decided to build massively powerful computer systems which sit there really doing nothing of any real value.

Good job I’m not a paranoid conspiracy theorist or I might admire such a brilliant strategy for quietly acquiring control. Discreet. Anonymous. Untraceable. Also effectively, infinite…

No need to build Terminators when your only real enemy can be so easily bought.

It's not useless to the people who mine it as it potentially has massive value ?

[Mussels]

It's not useless to the people who mine it as it potentially has massive value ?

Indeed but why? Reminds me of the Golgafrinchams adopting the leaf as currency then burning down all the trees to control rampant inflation.

What actual practical purpose does running hugely time (and energy) consuming mathematical computations have? Yes I appreciate those calculations have been assigned a “value” but they have served no actual functional purpose.

It's about as meaningful as mining precious gems.

[weeksy]

It's not useless to the people who mine it as it potentially has massive value ?

Indeed but why? Reminds me of the Golgafrinchams adopting the leaf as currency then burning down all the trees to control rampant inflation.

What actual practical purpose does running hugely time (and energy) consuming mathematical computations have? Yes I appreciate those calculations have been assigned a “value” but they have served no actual functional purpose.

The why doesn't matter to 99.9% of people who mine them, the fact it has value is enough why

If someone can put in £20k and get out £200k who cares about why. Humans are very money driven

[weeksy]

The why doesn't matter to 99.9% of people who mine them, the fact it has value is enough why

If someone can put in £20k and get out £200k who cares about why. Humans are very money driven

I think I just said that.

Lovely

[Count Steer]

It's not useless to the people who mine it as it potentially has massive value ?

Indeed but why? Reminds me of the Golgafrinchams adopting the leaf as currency then burning down all the trees to control rampant inflation.

What actual practical purpose does running hugely time (and energy) consuming mathematical computations have? Yes I appreciate those calculations have been assigned a “value” but they have served no actual functional purpose.

It reminds me of those islanders (Yap islands in Micronesia) that have things like millstones as currency. Absolutely useless, hard to make and in limited supply. Some of them are up to 4m diameter.

I wonder if they ever do any business 'off-island'?

[Mr. Dazzle]

Aren't they intended to stop any one person being rich though? Kinda the point that they're stupid.

[Count Steer]

Aren't they intended to stop any one person being rich though? Kinda the point that they're stupid.

Not too different I suppose, from coinage and notes (slightly different scale!) - they only have value because that's what enough people have agreed to assign to them. (Different when money was made of valuable material of course. S'why coins have milled edges (historically), you could see when someone had clipped a bit off).

[Cousin Jack]

Not too different I suppose, from coinage and notes (slightly different scale!) - they only have value because that's what enough people have agreed to assign to them. (Different when money was made of valuable material of course. S'why coins have milled edges (historically), you could see when someone had clipped a bit off).

Except gold and silver had little 'real' value, you couldn't eat them and they were pretty useless as practical metals for making stuff. They were only 'valuable' because they were scarce, and they could be hoarded for years without tarnishing. Gold has a usefulness today, but that is a pretty recent thing.

[Count Steer]

Not too different I suppose, from coinage and notes (slightly different scale!) - they only have value because that's what enough people have agreed to assign to them. (Different when money was made of valuable material of course. S'why coins have milled edges (historically), you could see when someone had clipped a bit off).

Except gold and silver had little 'real' value, you couldn't eat them and they were pretty useless as practical metals for making stuff. They were only 'valuable' because they were scarce, and they could be hoarded for years without tarnishing. Gold has a usefulness today, but that is a pretty recent thing.

Gold and silver are very workable metals - using limited kit. Many useable things were made from it. Sure, alternatives to gold goblets and belt buckles were available but it's value was always because you could actually make and remake (nice) things from them. I'd call that useful.

ie wot Screwd said.

[Cousin Jack]

Yes, they ate shiny and pretty. Yes, they are available in pretty shapes. Yes they are rare and expensive, and a good way of flaunting your wealth. Much like a Lambo today, technically it is a transport machine, but a piss poor one. Good way to show you a millionaire though.

Gold was rare and shiny, so it was collected like a magpie collects shiny things, as a status symbol.

[Yambo]

I wouldn't normally watch Piers Morgan but this popped up on my screen and I was interested.

[Count Steer]

I read an interesting comment on why a number of the voices calling for a legislative framework for AI development and deployment are coming from the AI companies. There's nothing quite like being hamstrung by legislation to strangle small, innovative companies, ie the potential competition. Meanwhile the big boys and their lawyers can take it in their stride by, effectively, controlling what's in the legislation (getting onto or 'buying' the members of the legislative bodies and/or ignoring it then tying it up in knots for years in the courts.

Clearly, the infrastructure for these AIs (eg humongous data/processing centres) is expensive so I can't see anyone doing a start-up in their back bedroom, but ideas and designs etc often come from small, innovative start-ups. Superficially you'd think that this would get a from the big boys...but there's always a chance that a rival will beat them to buying up anything that looks promising - so they'd rather not risk it.

So, next time a Google exec goes on about the dangers and the need for legislation there might be a bit more to it...and the exec that just 'left the company' might just be putting a bit of clear water between themself and Google (decontaminating) ready to hop onto the legislative body. Beware the Trojan executive.

I can't remember what it was in though. It did make me more cynical about these industry voices clamouring for legislation.

[Yambo]

I'm not sure, but there seems to be a slight whiff of conspiracy theory in your post CS . . .

Maybe not having had Covid has had a different affect on my olfactory system.

[Count Steer]

I'm not sure, but there seems to be a slight whiff of conspiracy theory in your post CS . . .

Maybe not having had Covid has had a different affect on my olfactory system.

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to be suspicious/cynical of the motives and manoeuvres of Big Tech. I just raised it as food for thought that things may not always be as they appear at first sniff. The very fact that some of these companies seem keen on legislation is a cause for at least a raised eyebrow or two).

(The article was very well thought through and logically presented - and I wish I could find the bloomin' thing).

[wheelnut]

I read an interesting comment on why a number of the voices calling for a legislative framework for AI development and deployment are coming from the AI companies. There's nothing quite like being hamstrung by legislation to strangle small, innovative companies, ie the potential competition. Meanwhile the big boys and their lawyers can take it in their stride by, effectively, controlling what's in the legislation (getting onto or 'buying' the members of the legislative bodies and/or ignoring it then tying it up in knots for years in the courts.

Clearly, the infrastructure for these AIs (eg humongous data/processing centres) is expensive so I can't see anyone doing a start-up in their back bedroom, but ideas and designs etc often come from small, innovative start-ups. Superficially you'd think that this would get a from the big boys...but there's always a chance that a rival will beat them to buying up anything that looks promising - so they'd rather not risk it.

So, next time a Google exec goes on about the dangers and the need for legislation there might be a bit more to it...and the exec that just 'left the company' might just be putting a bit of clear water between themself and Google (decontaminating) ready to hop onto the legislative body. Beware the Trojan executive.

I can't remember what it was in though. It did make me more cynical about these industry voices clamouring for legislation.

I think it was in The Times a few days ago. As conspiracy theories go, it’s not very far-fetched tbh. I doubt there’s any clear cooperation between the big players, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that thought had crossed their minds.

[Count Steer]

I think it was in The Times a few days ago. As conspiracy theories go, it’s not very far-fetched tbh. I doubt there’s any clear cooperation between the big players, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that thought had crossed their minds.

Might have been the Saturday edition (it's the only one I see), either that or the FT or Spectator.

It reminded me of a recent TV programme on food safety where it seems that the manufacturers have a bunch of puppets on the advisory bodies. I suppose if you need experts on such things you go to scientists who work in that area....who quite frequently have a project portfolio funded by....the manufacturers.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Its the same with any legislation, the people who know enough to write it are the same people who can take advantage of loopholes.

Sort of catch 22, waddaya gonna do?

[MrLongbeard]

food safety where it seems that the manufacturers have a bunch of puppets on the advisory bodies.

It's the same as any working group, standards committee, directive & regulation group, they're made up of folk from industry, labs, stake holders etc etc.
Hell they'll let anyone in, I've been asked to join one again, I just need to decide if I need the aggro or not.

[Supermofo]

I have a pretty good idea what I would do. I’ll frame it as a question: if you were offered a brain implant which gave you extraordinary access to all human knowledge and built in network connectivity, would you take it? I fucking would! Because you can bet your bottom dollar every other fucker will jump at the chance of a 200+ IQ. Why not? You only live once, though it is perfectly possible, a super-intelligent being could easily modify our genome to stop or even reverse the aging process. Would anyone (in their right mind) say no to that?

Must say I'm the opposite. I remember Indiana Jones and all them Nazi's chasing immortality and learning beyond the ages. It never went well for them!

Nah. I'm happy with the wonder of things. Knowing there is so much to learn and doing so with the things I'm interested in is great. Knowing 'everything' seems a bit like just ideally clicking on the google symbol and endless scrolling through everything from what's happening in Love Island to the war in Ukraine.

[Count Steer]

food safety where it seems that the manufacturers have a bunch of puppets on the advisory bodies.

It's the same as any working group, standards committee, directive & regulation group, they're made up of folk from industry, labs, stake holders etc etc.
Hell they'll let anyone in, I've been asked to join one again, I just need to decide if I need the aggro or not.

I know that's true. They even let me in. (In my case on the one hand you had 'regulatory advisors' on the other you had 'the regulators'...who were the least impressive bunch of politically appointed jobsworths I ever met in the industry. Now we wonder why the various regulators couldn't find their bum in the bath let alone regulate anything. )