Why can’t we expect that after a few years Claude Sonnet level of capability won’t be possible to accomplish locally?
Because when you’re old enough to remember what AIM chat it’s could do 25 years ago, it stops being impressive what today’s chatbots can do…
It’s seems “new” because everyone hated it and it was just a novelty back then.
But if you read up on them, they did 90% of what modern ones do. And if they had access to today’s computing, the only explanation for why they still suck so much, is that no one has ever wanted them.
Our capitalist society legally obligates corporations to maximize share holder return at all costs.
If they don’t, the shareholders sue the corporation they own, and win.
It’s not “greed mode” it’s not even that they’re always in that mode.
It’s like a fucking George Foreman grill, there’s no switches or modes. If it’s plugged in, this is what’s happening. There’s no way to have the system plugged in and not doing this
Like if someone turned on a light switch, and then asked why the room gets brighter every time they turn the switch on. Everything is working as designed…
The goal isn’t preventing kids from seeing anything, it’s about getting them used to websites/apps asking for facial ID.
It only needs to happen a couple times to tie your browsing history across the whole Internet to you.
The AI can’t guess ages, it can’t tie a minor to a driver’s licenses…
But when those kids turn 16 and get their pictures uploaded with name, DLN, and likely SSN it can all be backfilled and that prior browsing history tied to the identity.
Tldr:
Everyone know it won’t do what they say, that’s fine with the people doing it because they’re not doing it for the reason they say they are.
It just throws out thousands of redflags, then humans need to review those bits.
But it’s a “one time thing” what matters more than the first time it’s run, is how many new redflags it generates over a time period.
I’d also be interested to see how this performs versus the same amount of manpower hours of code review.
Like, they’re gonna find shit, even if looking at random code.
So ideally we’d need to take an identical code as and audit it:
AI telling humans where to look
Humans looking randomly
Humans telling humans where to look
And I feel like once again we’re gonna see that the only real benefit of “AI” as we know it, is doing the initial basic steps. It’s heavily biased to false redflags, but we want that because a false positive is just wasting some hours looking into it, a false negative means it goes uncaught.
If it had a 100% identify rate, it would just mean it’s definitely not catching everything.
But again, that confusion is because people keep acting like it can replace humans instead of assisting them.
We put this real question to AI Mode, “Why does Google Search suck now?” And you won’t believe the answer! (Actually, you won’t be surprised.)
The Chocolate Factory’s AI search substitute offered this completely trustworthy reply:
"You are definitely not imagining it. Users, tech critics, and researchers have documented a measurable decline in Google Search quality. The core issue is that the search engine no longer feels like a tool designed to find the best corner of the web; instead, it feels like a vehicle designed to keep you on Google-owned properties or clicking on monetized links.
“The degradation of Google Search stems from a mix of aggressive monetization, an ongoing arms race with web spammers, and the disruptive introduction of AI features.”
AI is gonna be the same path. Once people trust it, it’ll stop mattering if it give the best info, what matters is if people buy products and believe advertisements/propaganda.
There just will never be as much money in providing nonbiased and accurate answers as there is in manipulating people. So as long as capitalism runs everything, the end goal will always be manipulating people for someone’s profit.
It’s not an accident, it’s not “enshitification”, it’s the natural and inevitable result of unregulated capitalism. The only way to avoid it, is to heavily regulate capitalism. Acting like it’s a separate problem that can be avoided without regulating capitalism just makes people think we can make unregulated capitalism work, if we could it would be working already.
The entire point of this is that owners wouldn’t need to pay attention. Their pets collar will just blare simple words/phrases at them and sometimes it’ll be right
It’ll almost always say “feed me” and the pet will almost always want that, so it’s gonna feel like it’s working.
It helps pets communicate, but only pets who have bad/lazy owners.
It doesn’t need to translate, just provide definitive answers and even the dumbest dog or cat would learn how to make the different sounds, and then what they mean.
It’ll help pets communicate, but only for people who don’t pay attention. It won’t magically lead to deeper meaning
And absolutely doesn’t need AI.
The biological organisms can adapt, the tech doesn’t need to.
No one is debating that sometimes Muslims vote progressive or something progressives vote for Muslims. The answer will never be 100% either way.
You said you wanted to talk about your link, but you’ve got the location wrong you don’t understand it was conservative politicians elected by conservative voters and I’m struggling to think of any excuse for why you think that link is valid
I’ve sure as shit wasted enough time as you as an individual though
I just wanted to make sure your one example was over a decade ago about the city council for a “city” of less than 30k people…
Maybe if you’re nice, we can cover who actually voted for them and what their political leanings were (hint: conservative, not progressive).
But honestly there’s a lot more after that, and I don’t think I’m gonna hang around long enough for you to understand, I’m probably just gonna give up on helping you.
You might recognize the CEO Bannon took over from, is the child actor that played Young Gordan Bombay in the Mighty Ducks…
And honestly, I’m like 99% sure it’s what started crypto in the first place. The oligarchs got a hit of digital money they control with almost zero oversight, and a couple years later crypto started popping up.
That article is 2008, and the first Bitcoin was created January 2009.
Literally the one that excelled at the online pivot.
He’s basically the old white guy from American History X, except because our timeline is extra crazy, he got involved with Chinese WoW gold farms and realized online games was even easier to recruit than webpages.
Like, he’s absolutely a piece of shit, but decades ago before the alcohol turned his brain completely to mush, he put in the first steps to getting us here. Not just politically but socially/culturally.
He was extremely effective, but he wouldn’t have been if he was forced to do all that shit in person where he could be punched in the face.
Steve Bannon hanging out with 10 year olds on a playground sets off alarm bells, but do it from behind a WoW avatar and it doesn’t stand out.
Again tho, it’s not the online games, its not the in person DnD, not the punk shows, not skateparks, not social media…
Those are all just places, and if Nazis are tolerate in any places, they set up shop and start recruiting. The only way to get rid of it and to keep it gone, is constantly being aware in every space that some day a Nazi might show up, and if they do the most important thing is that they leave. If everyone does that, it works. But everyone has to do it, they can’t have a safe space because they’ll only use it to make everywhere else less safe.
It’s not social media itself, it’s social media companies tolerating the intolerant.
Back in the day nazis recruited at punk shows, so when they showed up you punched them in the face and they left. Fucking easiest 2 minute conflict resolution ever and it kept them check for decades while letting teenage punks have a valid target for their rage.
Then daytime TV (Springer, Ricky lake, that shit) started bringing them on, and letting them get their message out, and they capitalized on that with early webpages and forums. Creating the same recruitment pipeline they use today, because people can’t physically punch them in the face online.
The mods/admins have to do that with bans.
When they don’t, it’s for the same reason as Springer. They want the conflict because conflict attracts eyeballs. But all it does is help nazis recruit.
Because when you’re old enough to remember what AIM chat it’s could do 25 years ago, it stops being impressive what today’s chatbots can do…
It’s seems “new” because everyone hated it and it was just a novelty back then.
But if you read up on them, they did 90% of what modern ones do. And if they had access to today’s computing, the only explanation for why they still suck so much, is that no one has ever wanted them.
The oligarchs just decided it didn’t matter