I’m not interested in books championing our reduction of human expansion. I want to see us reach out into the stars one day. Technological development and progress is needed. We need to also change our mindset on current systems. E.g., if it doesn’t maximize return on investment, forget about it. If there is a way to do it slightly cheaper even if it’s detrimental, do it cheaper. That mindset sucks.
That’s probably going to be one of the main weapons against us, the media generating fake news using AI to control us.
I completely agree. However the genie is out of the bottle. Not much we can do to prevent it at this point, but there is plenty we can do to learn about it and defend against is abuse against us.
I am biased, I am having a ton of fun with LLMs and they are helping me achieve some personal goals. Do they use energy? Sure. Will new, more powerful technologies come along later that require even greater amounts of energy? I hope so one day. We need to find cleaner more abundant energy sources.
Well for me, I enjoy pair programming my own projects with offline models. I also bounce ideas off it to attempt to ground myself in some type of reality (some models are better for this than others… probably has risk of delusions of grandeur. Some models will just verbally suck you off which is annoying).
I built ansible tooling for deploying k3s kubernetes and Ceph-backed Proxmox clusters and VMs and containers and services. Utilized the help of LLMs to structure my playbooks and figure out how roles work.
I love learning new things and LLMs have a lot to offer in that regard. You have to watch out for the bullshit and independently look at other sources as well, but it’s a great starting point and I can sometimes have sone deep conversations around some topics.
I’m not sure regulation is going to be an open for this in the US anytime soon. Maybe EU can show us the way.
I think it’s probably a bit early to tell for certain on that assessment. There is definitely pros and cons to all technology. Electricity production causes environmental damage, building wooden houses require logging. Plastics are a byproduct of a withering industry. Asbestos might have saved more lives than it took, but there were probably much better ways to solve fire resistant buildings.
Why all these destructive things? Capitalism requires maximizing profits above all else. So, really the question is how will capitalism fuck us over with AI? So, so many ways. That’s why it’s important that we build community understanding of this technology in order to combat it. It’s not going away. It’s here to stay. So we either put our heads in the sand and pretend it’s not here or we can embrace it and learn how it works and how to defeat it and come up with open source tooling to combat it.
I’m in the latter camp. I love technology breakthroughs and want to learn first hand the capabilities to understand how it will be used against me and how I can use it.
Restricting our energy use is not a very good end game. We need to learn how to unlock more energy production without destruction of the environment. This will happen through technological development. Temporarily rationing or conservation may be needed, but permanent is not the answer.
Honestly using the existing question stock to generate current-version answers using the current documentation as synthetic training data is probably the way to go.
At some point, someone said the same thing about:
Is this /c/technology or /c/anti_technology because it’s hard to tell most of the time.
Realistically not going to happen anytime soon in the US at least.