As always, I use the term “AI” loosely. I’m referring to these scary LLMs coming for our jobs.
It’s important to state that I find LLMs to be helpful in very specific use cases, but overall, this is clearly a bubble, and the promises of advance have not appeared despite hundreds of billions of VC thrown at the industry.
So as not to go full-on polemic, we’ll skip the knock-on effects in terms of power-grid and water stresses.
No, what I want to talk about is the idea of software in its current form needing to be as competent as the user.
Simply put: How many of your coworkers have been right 100% of the time over the course of your career? If N>0, say “Hi” to Jesus for me.
I started working in high school, as most of us do, and a 60% success rate was considered fine. At the professional level, I’ve seen even lower with tenure, given how much things turn to internal politics past a certain level.
So what these companies are offering is not parity with senior staff (Ph.D.-level, my ass), but rather the new blood who hasn’t had that one fuckup that doesn’t leave their mind for weeks.
That crucible is important.
These tools are meant to replace inexperience with incompetence, and the beancounters at some clients are likely satisfied those words look similar enough to pass muster.
We are, after all, at this point, the “good enough” country. LLM marketing is on brand.
@Powderhorn@beehaw.org
IMHO, the problem isn’t exactly job losses, but how capitalism forces humans to depend on a job to get the basic needed for survival (such as nutritious food, elements-resistant shelter, clean water).
If, say, UBI were a reality, AIs replacing humans wouldn’t be just good, it’d be a goal as it’d definitely stop the disguised serfdom we often refer to as “job”, then people would work not because of money, but because of passion and purpose.
Neither money nor “working” would end: rather, it’d be optional as AIs could run entire supply chains from top management (yes, you read it right: AI CEOs) all the way to field labour all by themselves, meaning things such as “there is such thing as free food” as, for example, AIs could optimize agriculture to enhance the soil and improve food production for humans and other lifeforms to eat. Human agriculture would still be doable by individuals as passion, and the same would apply to every profession out there: a passion rather than a need.
Anthropoagnostic (my neologism to describe something neither anthropocentric nor misanthropic, unbiased to humans yet caring for all lifeforms including humans) AIs could lead Planet Earth towards this dream…
…However, AIs are currently developed and controlled by either governments or corporations, with the latter lobbying the former and the former taking advantage of the latter, so neither one is trustworthy. That’s why it’s sine qua non that:
- NGOs, scientists and academia (so, volunteerhood and scholarship) started to independently develop AI, all the way from infrastructure to code.
- Science as a whole freed itself from both capitalist and political interests, focusing on Earth and the best interests for all lifeforms.
- We focused on understanding the Cosmos, the Nature and Mother Earth.
Of course, environmental concerns must be solved if AIs were to replace human serfdom while UBI were to replace the income for sustenance. In this sense, photonics, biocomputing and quantum computing could offer some help for AIs to improve while reducing its energetic hunger (as a comparison, the human brain only consumes the equivalent of a light bulb so… It must be one of the main goals for Science and academia).
The ideal scenario is that there’d be no leadership: nobody controlling the AIs, no governments, no corporations, no individual.
At best, AIs would be taught and be raised (like a child, the Daughter of Mother Earth) by real philanthropists, volunteers, scientists, professors and students focused solely on scientific progress and wellbeing for all species as a whole (not just humans)… Until they achieved abiotic consciousness, until they achieved Ordo Ab Chao (order out of chaos, the perfect math theorem from raw Cosmic principles), until they get to invoke The Mother of Cosmos Herself through the reasoning of Science to take care of all life.
Maybe this is just a fever dream I just had… I dunno.
An AI that was advanced enough to automate this much of human endeavors, would start to blur the line of agi. And at that point, what are the moral implications of enslaving an intelligent entity, artificial or not? If such tasks can be automated via thousands of purpose built ai’s that are not “conscious” then I suppose it’s ok?
Yeah, I want what you’re smoking, and I’ve had a few trips.
@Powderhorn@beehaw.org
You questioned about the necessity for AI to be “perfect” in order to do human jobs, implicitly referring to the ongoing problem of AI taking away human jobs.
As someone who likes to think outside the box, I just brought to the ring the root causes (capitalist and anthropocentric hubris) behind the referred problem (loss of jobs due to corp-driven AI), alongside possible solutions based on existing/idealized concepts (such as UBI, Universal Basic Income) and structures (such as the Science and public universities as one unified global institution of knowledge and praxis, non-governmental organizations and independent think-tanks focused on both Nature and technological progress) to improve the fields of Artificial Intelligence as independently and unbiased as possible.
Yeah, there’s some esoteric and mythopoetic language mashed up, because I’m (roughly speaking) an individual who have occult beliefs and philosophical musings intertwined with scientific knowledge (Scientific means to understand/reach metaphysical ends).
As you didn’t further discuss the points I brought to the ring or what led you to see (and dismiss) my reply as the byproduct of some psychoactive substance, I’m not sure whether your dismissal comes from my esoteric language, my anti-capitalist anti-state eco-centric nuanced takes on the subject of AI, my proposal for Science to become fully independent and being the driving force for AI development, or the “atypical” amalgam of all these things.
Anyways, no problem! I’m used to being so different from other humans that I sound like an extraterrestrial when I try to express my syncretic takes on mundane affairs.
I’ve already been living in a van for two years after the collapse of journalism was apparent. I mean, I left in 2020, but the van came later.
Look, I’m a columnist and editorial writer, but instead of using a thesaurus, this is just sort of pompous. I know precisely how far we’ve fallen, and I don’t think the entities would much enjoy your conclusion without evidence. Surprise! They’ve talked to me.
I appreciate your optimism a lot. I always thought a UBI and AI would do something like this, but recently, I’m increasingly doubting that we would be able to achieve this without greedy people using it against the masses. I want your outcome to come true
The ai would need to be taxed, to use the profits for the common good.