• TargaryenTKE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Hi I’m new to this debate and I agree with you that language matters and all that stuff you said at the end. That being said, I’m firmly in the camp of “LLMs are bad, but a ‘true’ AI would be even worse for us”. I could type up several paragraphs diving into the several reasons why I think that way, but to save time (and to get back to my job) I’m just going to steal this Frank Herbert quote:

    Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them

    Do I think AI, in a vacuum, is always bad and will be no matter who or what makes it? No, not necessarily. But whatever we build will be inherently, and intrinsically tied to the micro- and macro-systems of our society, which are all DEEPLY fucked. Consequently, any AI we bring in would also, even if not initially, end up as being equally, deeply, fucked and end up being far, FAR more detrimental than positive

    • thinkingofyouihaveananxietydisorder@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      we can argue what actual ai would be, as long as we agree that it remains very firmly in the realm of science fucking fiction, just this side of inertial dampener fields and FTL travel.

      I do agree that any ai made by this society as it exists would be apocalyptic. all its stories about ‘evil ai’ are just metaphors for itself. we have already given up our thinking to computers (which don’t yet think) and corporations and kings and markets. we fucking love giving up our thinking. it’s like the whole appeal of fascism for most fascists.