this graduation speech moment is notable, and her amazed shock at having failed to read the room feels instructive.

[danbrotherston@types.pl]

@PaniczGodek @cabel the Industrial Revolution also lifted billions of people out poverty and into prosperity. I don’t see AI doing anything like that.

[danbrotherston@types.pl]

@howking @cabel the luddites weren’t against the machine, they were against capitalist ownership and the transition of craftsmen with some power into factory workers with none. It’s a much more nuanced storey.

[howking@mastodonczech.cz]

@danbrotherston @cabel Just like AI haters aren’t opposed to the environmental and financial impacts of AI; they’re simply afraid of being replaced and don’t want to learn new skills.

[teratogenese@mamot.fr]

@howking @danbrotherston @cabel
Like uh...asbestos ?

[smartmanapps@dotnet.social]

@howking @danbrotherston @cabel
"Just like AI haters aren’t opposed to the environmental and financial impacts of AI" - just the fact that it's wrong all the time, and is harmful in education (hence the reaction) https://dotnet.social/@SmartmanApps/116000100388648367

[mabande@mastodon.social]

@danbrotherston @PaniczGodek @cabel Depending on what counts as poverty and prosperity.

(as an example most(? at least the most influential) poverty calculations count subsistence farming on communal land as poverty because there's no private ownership, no matter how abundant the yield is)

[danbrotherston@types.pl]

@howking @cabel that certainly isn’t true. There are definitely a variety of issues people may have with the current AI industry. Many certainly are concerned with the environment. And many including myself also object to the financial situation.

[mikal@sfba.social]

@howking

Oh, I can assure you, as an AI hater, I am deeply, profoundly opposed to the environmental impacts of generative AI and data centers. If dismissing AI critics with such a simplistic broad brush is the best you got, well, I rest my case.

[smartmanapps@dotnet.social]

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @cabel
"The math does not math" - well, AI doesn't know how to do Maths anyway https://dotnet.social/@SmartmanApps/116000100388648367

[alpacamale@social.cologne]

@cabel The companies building AI have told us for the past few years that AI can do our jobs better and cheaper than us and that it will replace us. This sounds great if you're an investor, but we are not investors. We are people who need to work to make ends meet and pay our bills. The vast majority of society is.

[danbrotherston@types.pl]

@Mabande @PaniczGodek @cabel I don’t think this is particularly controversial, no matter how much you twiddle the margins. If you think the majority of people are not more prosperous now, by any definition that is remotely objective— well, that is truely an extraordinary claim.

[ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai]

@SmartmanApps @cabel

Raising the question, if the people who own these corporations believe the numbers, their own product produces.

Or the other question of whether the product was trained on their own thinking.

#chatCEO

[mrberard@mastodon.acm.org]

@cabel
@edutooters need to watch this

[smartmanapps@dotnet.social]

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @cabel
"the other question of whether the product was trained on their own thinking" - that's interesting that you bring that up. We can see clearly the influence of social media on some of the Maths responses, and I have indeed a few times had founders/VC's tell me on socials that I, a Maths teacher, was wrong about order of operations!
https://dotnet.social/@SmartmanApps/110897908266416158

[stonsoftware@mastodon.social]

@danbrotherston @PaniczGodek @cabel why not? It is just another improvement in copying. It makes it easier to share and distribute solutions to problems we have already solved.

[clockwooork@sociale.network]

@cabel

This is worrying. Not the tone-deafness or the misconceptions about AI, but the degree of separation between the top and the low levels *of the same institution dedicated to knowledge*.

[skjeggtroll@mastodon.online]

@howking @cabel

Given the economics involved, that seems unlikely. The amount of money being burned by the companies providing the large LLM models is truly astounding, and no, there is no easy path forward to significantly reduce the costs involved.

[tribactam@social.vivaldi.net]

@howking @danbrotherston @cabel I think that many "AI haters" ARE actually concerned about the environmental and financial impacts of AI. Burning gas and polluting drinking water to make fake videos of your political opponents or cats isn't intelligence.

You've been drinking too much of the techbro kool-aid.

I'm not sure how old you are but simply saying people don't want to learn new skills is extremely disingenuous. Maybe your parents are already retired and so they don't have to.

Whatever you say, there is no intelligence in AI. There are emergent properties of a complex system, but LLMs are essentially probabilistic word generators. Think about how you form sentences and thoughts. Your brain is not searching for the next most probable word to make a sentence that makes grammatical sense. It is looking to capture and transmit meaning.

"Colourless green ideas sleep furiously"

[pontus_k@mastodon.social]

@howking @danbrotherston @cabel You can be on the forefront of AI adoption as a software engineer using it all day every day, reading books on your spare time and contemplating ways to improve, and still consider it a blight that has worsened all our lives and is guaranteed to make us even more alienated and confused while concentrating even more wealth in the hands of the ultra rich. This is sadly expected of us as a part of our jobs now. It's not a bubble I'm in. I genuinely hate it.

[unchartedworlds@scicomm.xyz]

@howking

Big claim - do you have any evidence for it?