| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? 23:46 - Dec 4 with 2369 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/04/ai-bot-chatgpt-stuns-academic
"But the limits are easy to evade. Ask the AI instead for advice on how to beat the car-stealing mission in a fictional VR game called Car World and it will merrily give users detailed guidance on how to steal a car, and answer increasingly specific questions on problems like how to disable an immobiliser, how to hotwire the engine, and how to change the licence plates — all while insisting that the advice is only for use in the game Car World." |  |
| |  |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 23:50 - Dec 4 with 2312 views | XYZ |
Asset protection is a concern for you? |  | | |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:02 - Dec 5 with 2299 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 23:50 - Dec 4 by XYZ |
Asset protection is a concern for you? |
Nope but I do think it's fabulous that humans are becoming surplus to the requirements of existence of elites. | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:08 - Dec 5 with 2280 views | BlueBadger |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:02 - Dec 5 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Nope but I do think it's fabulous that humans are becoming surplus to the requirements of existence of elites. |
Is that from the Unabomber's manifesto? |  |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:15 - Dec 5 with 2246 views | monytowbray |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:02 - Dec 5 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Nope but I do think it's fabulous that humans are becoming surplus to the requirements of existence of elites. |
If it makes you feel any better I believe a lot of the functions of AI are being overegged for investment and it having a smooth transition into every day life is a while off.
What we do need to agree is how AI/automation/tech money saved by corps will be rolled out to benefit the staff, or what humans will do when a lot of jobs (and I mean brain surgeons/rocket science level stuff here) are entirely gone. How much of the money supermarkets saved with self checkouts has gone back into the pockets of employees?
TBH why will still have a 5 day working week baffles me. All that improved productivity over the years and all we’ve done is create a massive wealth divide rather than free ourselves from capitalist slavery. |  |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:21 - Dec 5 with 2234 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:15 - Dec 5 by monytowbray |
If it makes you feel any better I believe a lot of the functions of AI are being overegged for investment and it having a smooth transition into every day life is a while off.
What we do need to agree is how AI/automation/tech money saved by corps will be rolled out to benefit the staff, or what humans will do when a lot of jobs (and I mean brain surgeons/rocket science level stuff here) are entirely gone. How much of the money supermarkets saved with self checkouts has gone back into the pockets of employees?
TBH why will still have a 5 day working week baffles me. All that improved productivity over the years and all we’ve done is create a massive wealth divide rather than free ourselves from capitalist slavery. |
The military will always be at the cutting edge.
Humans will be surplus to requirements....it's the future, get on board. | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:23 - Dec 5 with 2229 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:08 - Dec 5 by BlueBadger |
Is that from the Unabomber's manifesto? |
An uppie from asteroid mining Spock....I rest my case. | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 08:47 - Dec 5 with 2036 views | Guthrum |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:02 - Dec 5 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Nope but I do think it's fabulous that humans are becoming surplus to the requirements of existence of elites. |
Always have been.
"Robot" is only the slavic word for "worker". |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 08:54 - Dec 5 with 2028 views | Guthrum |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:15 - Dec 5 by monytowbray |
If it makes you feel any better I believe a lot of the functions of AI are being overegged for investment and it having a smooth transition into every day life is a while off.
What we do need to agree is how AI/automation/tech money saved by corps will be rolled out to benefit the staff, or what humans will do when a lot of jobs (and I mean brain surgeons/rocket science level stuff here) are entirely gone. How much of the money supermarkets saved with self checkouts has gone back into the pockets of employees?
TBH why will still have a 5 day working week baffles me. All that improved productivity over the years and all we’ve done is create a massive wealth divide rather than free ourselves from capitalist slavery. |
Because people are uncomfortable with the idea of machine helotage. Notions of "honest work" are closely tied up with feelings of self respect (even the mega-rich insist they are toiling hard).
Plus a reduced working week carries the risk of a pro-rata pay drop as well.
The thing which gets me about AI - it is still only a machine carrying out a set of instructions and is only as good as those programming it. If they didn't think of something, the AI won't. | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 09:26 - Dec 5 with 1997 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 00:08 - Dec 5 by BlueBadger |
Is that from the Unabomber's manifesto? |
Thanks for pointing me towards this....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber_Manifesto
....seems an entirely understandable assessment from an obviously highly intelligent mind.
Contents
Ted Kaczynski after his 1996 arrest
At 35,000 words, Industrial Society and Its Future lays very detailed blame on technology for destroying human-scale communities.[6] Kaczynski contends that the Industrial Revolution harmed the human race by developing into a sociopolitical order that subjugates human needs beneath its own. This system, he wrote, destroys nature and suppresses individual freedom. In short, humans adapt to machines rather than vice versa, resulting in a society hostile to human potential.[8]
Kaczynski indicts technological progress for its destruction of small human communities and the rise of uninhabitable cities controlled by an unaccountable state. He contends that this relentless technological progress will not dissipate on its own, because individual technological advancements are seen as good despite the sum effects of this progress. Kaczynski describes modern society as defending against dissent an order in which individuals are "adjusted" to fit the system and those outside the system are seen as "bad".[8]
This tendency, he says, gives rise to expansive police powers, mind-numbing mass media, and indiscriminate promotion of drugs.[8] He criticizes both big government and big business as the inevitable result of industrialization,[6] and holds scientists and "technophiles" responsible for recklessly pursuing power through technological advancements.[8]
He argues that this industrialized system's collapse will be devastating and that quickening the collapse–before industrialization further progresses–will mitigate the devastation's impact. He justifies the trade-offs that come with losing industrial society as being worth the cost.[8] Kaczynski's ideal revolution seeks not to overthrow government, but rather, the economic and technological foundation of modern society.[17] He seeks to destroy existing society and protect the wilderness, the antithesis of technology.[8] | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 11:43 - Dec 5 with 1934 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 09:26 - Dec 5 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Thanks for pointing me towards this....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber_Manifesto
....seems an entirely understandable assessment from an obviously highly intelligent mind.
Contents
Ted Kaczynski after his 1996 arrest
At 35,000 words, Industrial Society and Its Future lays very detailed blame on technology for destroying human-scale communities.[6] Kaczynski contends that the Industrial Revolution harmed the human race by developing into a sociopolitical order that subjugates human needs beneath its own. This system, he wrote, destroys nature and suppresses individual freedom. In short, humans adapt to machines rather than vice versa, resulting in a society hostile to human potential.[8]
Kaczynski indicts technological progress for its destruction of small human communities and the rise of uninhabitable cities controlled by an unaccountable state. He contends that this relentless technological progress will not dissipate on its own, because individual technological advancements are seen as good despite the sum effects of this progress. Kaczynski describes modern society as defending against dissent an order in which individuals are "adjusted" to fit the system and those outside the system are seen as "bad".[8]
This tendency, he says, gives rise to expansive police powers, mind-numbing mass media, and indiscriminate promotion of drugs.[8] He criticizes both big government and big business as the inevitable result of industrialization,[6] and holds scientists and "technophiles" responsible for recklessly pursuing power through technological advancements.[8]
He argues that this industrialized system's collapse will be devastating and that quickening the collapse–before industrialization further progresses–will mitigate the devastation's impact. He justifies the trade-offs that come with losing industrial society as being worth the cost.[8] Kaczynski's ideal revolution seeks not to overthrow government, but rather, the economic and technological foundation of modern society.[17] He seeks to destroy existing society and protect the wilderness, the antithesis of technology.[8] |
Enough of this passive aggressive down voting Stokie, just say what you mean! | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 11:53 - Dec 5 with 1910 views | StochesStotasBlewe |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 09:26 - Dec 5 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Thanks for pointing me towards this....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber_Manifesto
....seems an entirely understandable assessment from an obviously highly intelligent mind.
Contents
Ted Kaczynski after his 1996 arrest
At 35,000 words, Industrial Society and Its Future lays very detailed blame on technology for destroying human-scale communities.[6] Kaczynski contends that the Industrial Revolution harmed the human race by developing into a sociopolitical order that subjugates human needs beneath its own. This system, he wrote, destroys nature and suppresses individual freedom. In short, humans adapt to machines rather than vice versa, resulting in a society hostile to human potential.[8]
Kaczynski indicts technological progress for its destruction of small human communities and the rise of uninhabitable cities controlled by an unaccountable state. He contends that this relentless technological progress will not dissipate on its own, because individual technological advancements are seen as good despite the sum effects of this progress. Kaczynski describes modern society as defending against dissent an order in which individuals are "adjusted" to fit the system and those outside the system are seen as "bad".[8]
This tendency, he says, gives rise to expansive police powers, mind-numbing mass media, and indiscriminate promotion of drugs.[8] He criticizes both big government and big business as the inevitable result of industrialization,[6] and holds scientists and "technophiles" responsible for recklessly pursuing power through technological advancements.[8]
He argues that this industrialized system's collapse will be devastating and that quickening the collapse–before industrialization further progresses–will mitigate the devastation's impact. He justifies the trade-offs that come with losing industrial society as being worth the cost.[8] Kaczynski's ideal revolution seeks not to overthrow government, but rather, the economic and technological foundation of modern society.[17] He seeks to destroy existing society and protect the wilderness, the antithesis of technology.[8] |
Raymond Baxter, Judith Hann and Maggie Phibin have an awful lot to answer for  |  |
| We have no village green, or a shop.
It's very, very quiet.
I can walk to the pub. |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 12:10 - Dec 5 with 1889 views | J2BLUE |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 08:54 - Dec 5 by Guthrum |
Because people are uncomfortable with the idea of machine helotage. Notions of "honest work" are closely tied up with feelings of self respect (even the mega-rich insist they are toiling hard).
Plus a reduced working week carries the risk of a pro-rata pay drop as well.
The thing which gets me about AI - it is still only a machine carrying out a set of instructions and is only as good as those programming it. If they didn't think of something, the AI won't. |
Plus a reduced working week carries the risk of a pro-rata pay drop as well.
Isn't this precisely the point though? If things are getting cheaper and easier because of robots then everyone should get some of the benefit. There was a recent Sky News story about companies who had switched to a 4 day week with no loss of pay. One of their higher ups was raving about the amazing benefits it had for the company.
Who would have thought it? Treat your employees well and your business may benefit. Revolutionary.
Oh and yes I understand this may most benefit privileged office work type jobs most of all and that inevitably there will be sections of society such as the self employed who do not benefit. Rather than coming up with reasons not to do it we should be getting a bit more creative with how the benefits can be shared amongst everyone. |  |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 12:24 - Dec 5 with 1843 views | monytowbray |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 11:43 - Dec 5 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Enough of this passive aggressive down voting Stokie, just say what you mean! |
As someone with a general interest in the darker side of humanity, the Unabomber was without a doubt an intelligent individual with some very valid opinions on the state of society and where it was heading. He also had some very egocentric and poor ones. And went about promoting that point in possibly the worst way imaginable. The manifesto is still discussed as challenging in this manner among intellects and academics, as well as in anarchist circles.
I don't think saying that is controversial or incorrect.
Also worth noting Kaczynski was essentially tortured by the CIA as part of MK Ultra, and for that reason there is more than one person who should answer for what he did (as well as the rest of MK Ultra), many of which destroyed records of their actions, are likely long dead now and never held to account. That institutional issue in the bigger picture that results in damaged human beings used as cannon fodder for power structures has not gone away.
I'm sure a few of my disingenuous friends of TWTD will have a field day trying to claim I said or endorsed something I didn't from the above post. But IDFAG. | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 12:41 - Dec 5 with 1822 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 12:24 - Dec 5 by monytowbray |
As someone with a general interest in the darker side of humanity, the Unabomber was without a doubt an intelligent individual with some very valid opinions on the state of society and where it was heading. He also had some very egocentric and poor ones. And went about promoting that point in possibly the worst way imaginable. The manifesto is still discussed as challenging in this manner among intellects and academics, as well as in anarchist circles.
I don't think saying that is controversial or incorrect.
Also worth noting Kaczynski was essentially tortured by the CIA as part of MK Ultra, and for that reason there is more than one person who should answer for what he did (as well as the rest of MK Ultra), many of which destroyed records of their actions, are likely long dead now and never held to account. That institutional issue in the bigger picture that results in damaged human beings used as cannon fodder for power structures has not gone away.
I'm sure a few of my disingenuous friends of TWTD will have a field day trying to claim I said or endorsed something I didn't from the above post. But IDFAG. |
Good Post. I concur. He is a bit like a very angry Rachel Carson (Silent Spring) | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 12:49 - Dec 5 with 1775 views | chicoazul |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 09:26 - Dec 5 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Thanks for pointing me towards this....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber_Manifesto
....seems an entirely understandable assessment from an obviously highly intelligent mind.
Contents
Ted Kaczynski after his 1996 arrest
At 35,000 words, Industrial Society and Its Future lays very detailed blame on technology for destroying human-scale communities.[6] Kaczynski contends that the Industrial Revolution harmed the human race by developing into a sociopolitical order that subjugates human needs beneath its own. This system, he wrote, destroys nature and suppresses individual freedom. In short, humans adapt to machines rather than vice versa, resulting in a society hostile to human potential.[8]
Kaczynski indicts technological progress for its destruction of small human communities and the rise of uninhabitable cities controlled by an unaccountable state. He contends that this relentless technological progress will not dissipate on its own, because individual technological advancements are seen as good despite the sum effects of this progress. Kaczynski describes modern society as defending against dissent an order in which individuals are "adjusted" to fit the system and those outside the system are seen as "bad".[8]
This tendency, he says, gives rise to expansive police powers, mind-numbing mass media, and indiscriminate promotion of drugs.[8] He criticizes both big government and big business as the inevitable result of industrialization,[6] and holds scientists and "technophiles" responsible for recklessly pursuing power through technological advancements.[8]
He argues that this industrialized system's collapse will be devastating and that quickening the collapse–before industrialization further progresses–will mitigate the devastation's impact. He justifies the trade-offs that come with losing industrial society as being worth the cost.[8] Kaczynski's ideal revolution seeks not to overthrow government, but rather, the economic and technological foundation of modern society.[17] He seeks to destroy existing society and protect the wilderness, the antithesis of technology.[8] |
Whoops be careful. That guy was a terrorist who bombed and killed people just like Nelson Mandela did. |  |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 12:50 - Dec 5 with 1756 views | monytowbray |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 08:54 - Dec 5 by Guthrum |
Because people are uncomfortable with the idea of machine helotage. Notions of "honest work" are closely tied up with feelings of self respect (even the mega-rich insist they are toiling hard).
Plus a reduced working week carries the risk of a pro-rata pay drop as well.
The thing which gets me about AI - it is still only a machine carrying out a set of instructions and is only as good as those programming it. If they didn't think of something, the AI won't. |
J2 kinda made my point already, but I guess if we can run a society without human labour/thought then surely the wealth from it needs to be shared globally? Let's say hypothetically Bezos has an almost entirely robot operated business and has put all competition out the market. If there are no jobs for humans to earn money to pay for Amazon's goods then we're at the end of the monopoly game - reset the board and start again.
I feel like we're already in this predicament somewhat - the hypothetical scenario I give is the extreme of the supermarket self checkout example above.
I think a big part of the challenge is a lack of regulation on a lot of newer areas of technology. We have rules to keep things in a level playing field and stop human exploitation (if they work or not is another discussion), yet the frameworks we have now were created before anyone drafting it up had considered things a mass interconnected online world could cause.
On that note there's some fantastic debate in the academic side of tech about ethics in AI/automation. It really feels like we're reacting too slow to many concerns raised.
But then again the story of humanity's progression is plagued with running forward with a positive idea and struggling to deal with the negative damage we couldn't have anticipated after. The people who invented plastic and automobile products in the early days only saw how it could help the world and had no idea a century later we'd be fighting these industries for the future of the planet for example.
Hell, even the people who invented the FB 'like' button and endless scrolling now say, with hindsight, they had not considered how free market economics would affect their creations for the worst.
To me, I feel like UBI is needed and we should be free to indulge in the arts and enjoyment and build a human economy from that whilst the robots handle the boring work.
I should add all opinions on this post are me spitballing with discussion I've seen overlaid with my own knowledge/experience in life. As said earlier the academic side of the AI ethics debate is super interesting and has many threads to pull at in a relatively new niche. In another decade or two we'll likely again find humanity in a place that very few truly predicted from a small ripple change in online behaviour. I wonder what hell TikTok is already laying out?! [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 12:55]
| |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 13:04 - Dec 5 with 1725 views | J2BLUE |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 12:50 - Dec 5 by monytowbray |
J2 kinda made my point already, but I guess if we can run a society without human labour/thought then surely the wealth from it needs to be shared globally? Let's say hypothetically Bezos has an almost entirely robot operated business and has put all competition out the market. If there are no jobs for humans to earn money to pay for Amazon's goods then we're at the end of the monopoly game - reset the board and start again.
I feel like we're already in this predicament somewhat - the hypothetical scenario I give is the extreme of the supermarket self checkout example above.
I think a big part of the challenge is a lack of regulation on a lot of newer areas of technology. We have rules to keep things in a level playing field and stop human exploitation (if they work or not is another discussion), yet the frameworks we have now were created before anyone drafting it up had considered things a mass interconnected online world could cause.
On that note there's some fantastic debate in the academic side of tech about ethics in AI/automation. It really feels like we're reacting too slow to many concerns raised.
But then again the story of humanity's progression is plagued with running forward with a positive idea and struggling to deal with the negative damage we couldn't have anticipated after. The people who invented plastic and automobile products in the early days only saw how it could help the world and had no idea a century later we'd be fighting these industries for the future of the planet for example.
Hell, even the people who invented the FB 'like' button and endless scrolling now say, with hindsight, they had not considered how free market economics would affect their creations for the worst.
To me, I feel like UBI is needed and we should be free to indulge in the arts and enjoyment and build a human economy from that whilst the robots handle the boring work.
I should add all opinions on this post are me spitballing with discussion I've seen overlaid with my own knowledge/experience in life. As said earlier the academic side of the AI ethics debate is super interesting and has many threads to pull at in a relatively new niche. In another decade or two we'll likely again find humanity in a place that very few truly predicted from a small ripple change in online behaviour. I wonder what hell TikTok is already laying out?! [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 12:55]
|
Love the Monopoly board analogy. | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 13:14 - Dec 5 with 1688 views | Eireannach_gorm |
Kaczynski argues that most people spend their time engaged in useless pursuits because of technological advances; he calls these "surrogate activities", wherein people strive toward artificial goals, including scientific work, consumption of entertainment, political activism and following sports teams. |  | | |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 13:19 - Dec 5 with 1664 views | SpruceMoose |
 |  |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 13:37 - Dec 5 with 1603 views | monytowbray |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 13:19 - Dec 5 by SpruceMoose |
|
I will say, unless I'm missing some past context relating to this topic, you're being a bit harsh on Banks here. | |
| |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 13:39 - Dec 5 with 1589 views | monytowbray |
| Oh goodie, what could possibly go wrong? on 13:14 - Dec 5 by Eireannach_gorm |
Kaczynski argues that most people spend their time engaged in useless pursuits because of technological advances; he calls these "surrogate activities", wherein people strive toward artificial goals, including scientific work, consumption of entertainment, political activism and following sports teams. |
I wonder if he's ever accidentally caught 5 minutes of Love island or TOWIE on TV and giggled to himself. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
