imadabouzu

joined 4 months ago
[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh man, anyone who runs on such existential maximalism has such infinite power to state things as if their conclusion has only one possible meaning.

How about invoking Monkey Paw -- what if every statement is true but just not in the way they think.

  1. A perfect memory which is infinitely copyable and scaleable is possible. And it's called, all the things in nature in sum.
  2. In fact, we're already there today, because it is, quite literally the sum of nature. The question for tomorrow is, "so like, what else is possible?"
  3. And it might not even have to try or do anything at all, especially if we don't bother to save ourselves from ecological disaster.
  4. What we don't know can literally be anything. That's why it's important not to project fantasy, but to conserve of the fragile beauty of what you have, regardless of whether things will "one day fall apart". Death and Taxes mate.

And yud can both one day technically right and whose interpretations today are dumb and worthy of mockery.

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The issue isn't even that AI is doing grading, really. There are worlds where using technology to assist in grading isn't a loss for a student.

The issue is that all of this is as an excuse not to invest in students at all and the turn here is purely a symptom of that. Because in a world where we invest in technology to assist in education, the first thing that happens is we recognize the completely unsexy and obvious things that also need to happen, like funding for maintenance of school buildings, basic supplies, balancing class sizes by hiring and redistricting, you know. The obvious shit.

But those things don't attract the attention of the debt metabolism, they're too obvious and don't include more leverage for short term futures. To believe there is a future for the next generation is risk inherent and ambiguous. You can only invest in that it if you actually care.

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yessir. Although I made the mistake of making a reservation at the new courtland grand and long story short have no idea if my reservation actually still exists or not so hey there's that.

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 18 points 2 months ago (10 children)

Yeah, this lines up with what I have heard, too. There is always talk of new models, but even the stuff in the pipeline not yet released isn't that differentiable from the existing stuff.

The best explanation of strawberry is that it isn't any particular thing, it's rather a marketing and project framing, both internal and external, that amounts to... cost optimizations, and hype driving. Shift the goal posts, tell two stories: one is if we just get affordable enough, genAI in a loop really can do everything (probably much more modest, when genAI gets cheap enough by several means, it'll have several more modest and generally useful use cases, also won't have to be so legally grey). The other is that we're already there and one day you'll wake up and your brain won't be good enough to matter anymore, or something.

Again, this is apparently the future of software releases. :/

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 6 points 3 months ago

Yeah that's totally fair, I just was tailgating the sneer I guess.

Almost never do they find a solution in anything in the left side of politics.

That's a good point, and I think it speaks well to their savior complex. They want above all to push the guilt and discomfort of social issues away so they don't have to live in the discomfort of reality. Dogma does this, and it really doesn't matter if you have the veneer of science or the mythology.

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 13 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Their minds are open to all ideas, so long as the idea is a closed form solution that looks edgy.

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I kind of wonder if this whole movement of rationalists believing they can "just" make things better than people already in the field comes from the contracting sense that being rich and having an expensive educational background may in fact be less important than having background experience and situational context in the future, two things they loath?

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 16 points 3 months ago

It's... it's almost as if the law about shareholder value as intended as a metaphor for accountability, not a literal, reductive claim that results in ouroboros. Almost like, our economic system is supposed to be a means, not an end in of itself?

No. Definitely can't be that.

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 21 points 3 months ago

If they squeeze this rock hard enough, maybe it'll bleed.

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 8 points 3 months ago

Procreate is an example of what good AI deployment looks like. They do use technology, and even machine learning, but they do it in obviously constructive scopes between where the artist's attention is focused. And they're committed to that because... there's no value for them to just be a thin wrapper on an already completely commoditized technology on its way to the courtroom to be challenged by landmark rulings with no more room ceiling to grow into whooooooops.

[–] imadabouzu@awful.systems 6 points 3 months ago

Stranger things have happened. But in either case, we should commit to supporting every effort. If one punch doesn't work take another. Death by a million cuts.

view more: ‹ prev next ›