Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. How many studies do researchers need to do before the threat of LLMs is taken seriously?

How many studies do researchers need to do before the threat of LLMs is taken seriously?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
20 Posts 9 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • malcircuit@thingy.socialM malcircuit@thingy.social

    @FormerlyStC Yeah, it's what they *think* they want, but they've also drank their own kool aid. They think it's a ladder pull, but it's more like sawing off the tree limb you're standing on. They think everything will keep ticking along like it has been, but it won't.

    formerlystc@mas.toF This user is from outside of this forum
    formerlystc@mas.toF This user is from outside of this forum
    formerlystc@mas.to
    wrote last edited by
    #6

    @malcircuit Sure, it’s the ladder they’re *standing on,* but anyone who’s watched Road Runner cartoons knows that you keep standing in the air after you take away the platform.

    This connects directly to the current administration being filled with people who love gangster movies because they never bothered to watch them all the way to the end. (And every other story, or history, that they try to cite in their favor.)

    abucci@buc.ciA 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • malcircuit@thingy.socialM malcircuit@thingy.social

      How many studies do researchers need to do before the threat of LLMs is taken seriously? This technology *might* have some useful niche applications, but widespread deployment will be a disaster for humanity.

      This shit is an existential hazard, and not in the way the AI companies love to talk about. It's not going to take over the world like Skynet, it's a cognitohazard that turns anyone that interacts with it into an idiot.

      Link Preview Image
      Adults Lose Skills to AI. Children Never Build Them.

      Discussions of cognitive offloading often miss a critical distinction: What AI does to a 45-year-old's brain is categorically different from what it does to a 14-year-old's.

      favicon

      Psychology Today (www.psychologytoday.com)

      malcircuit@thingy.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
      malcircuit@thingy.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
      malcircuit@thingy.social
      wrote last edited by
      #7

      Thinking about LLM-based "AI" chatbots as cognitohazards is apt. They are deceptive and subversive in an extremely subtle but systematic way. They warp your perception and cognition to make you _feel_ as if you're more capable while simultaneously degrading your skills.

      floppy@mastodon.me.ukF malcircuit@thingy.socialM 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • malcircuit@thingy.socialM malcircuit@thingy.social

        Thinking about LLM-based "AI" chatbots as cognitohazards is apt. They are deceptive and subversive in an extremely subtle but systematic way. They warp your perception and cognition to make you _feel_ as if you're more capable while simultaneously degrading your skills.

        floppy@mastodon.me.ukF This user is from outside of this forum
        floppy@mastodon.me.ukF This user is from outside of this forum
        floppy@mastodon.me.uk
        wrote last edited by
        #8

        @malcircuit "There is no antimemetics division" but where the antimemes are LLMs.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • malcircuit@thingy.socialM malcircuit@thingy.social

          Thinking about LLM-based "AI" chatbots as cognitohazards is apt. They are deceptive and subversive in an extremely subtle but systematic way. They warp your perception and cognition to make you _feel_ as if you're more capable while simultaneously degrading your skills.

          malcircuit@thingy.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
          malcircuit@thingy.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
          malcircuit@thingy.social
          wrote last edited by
          #9

          These chatbots are like an amulet cursed by dark magic. It grants the wearer an apparent intelligence boost, at the cost of stealing their soul over time and binding them to the object. After extensive use, taking the amulet off incapacitates the person. They can't live without it.

          malcircuit@thingy.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • formerlystc@mas.toF formerlystc@mas.to

            @malcircuit Sure, it’s the ladder they’re *standing on,* but anyone who’s watched Road Runner cartoons knows that you keep standing in the air after you take away the platform.

            This connects directly to the current administration being filled with people who love gangster movies because they never bothered to watch them all the way to the end. (And every other story, or history, that they try to cite in their favor.)

            abucci@buc.ciA This user is from outside of this forum
            abucci@buc.ciA This user is from outside of this forum
            abucci@buc.ci
            wrote last edited by
            #10
            @FormerlyStC@mas.to @malcircuit@thingy.social The economy, politics, and tech is centering around how to keep the deca- and hectobillionaires fully insulated from the problems they directly cause. As far as I can see they are not sawing off their own ladders or anything like that. They are consolidating their position at the tippy top. Their position there does not depend on the masses being educated, literate, or particularly skilled anymore. Instead, it requires the masses to be docile. I will start believing that this situation is changing when the masses are no longer docile, but there's not much evidence of that, at least not in the US as far as I can see.

            It's possible the wealthy and powerful have miscalculated and current automation is not enough to allow them to retain an acceptable lifestyle while being fully decoupled from the masses. However, I don't see this as a foregone conclusion, even as I personally believe it is probably true.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • malcircuit@thingy.socialM malcircuit@thingy.social

              These chatbots are like an amulet cursed by dark magic. It grants the wearer an apparent intelligence boost, at the cost of stealing their soul over time and binding them to the object. After extensive use, taking the amulet off incapacitates the person. They can't live without it.

              malcircuit@thingy.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
              malcircuit@thingy.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
              malcircuit@thingy.social
              wrote last edited by
              #11

              I should stop talking about AI. Like so many other social issues, I'm only preaching to the converted. All it does is remind people of Yet Another Bad Thing You Have No Power To Change.

              Or to put it a different way, whatever levers you have available to influence the situation are probably already being pushed. Me reminding you doesn't do anything other than make you feel worse.

              affekt@hachyderm.ioA 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • faithisleaping@anarres.familyF faithisleaping@anarres.family

                @malcircuit People don't care about studies. They care about money and right now LLMs promise them more money.

                They're wrong. They'll be proven wrong. But it'll take time and some MASSIVE failures, first.

                Fortunately, if the news is to be believed, Zuckerberg is doing his hardest to destroy Meta with AI so it may come sooner than later.

                sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
                sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
                sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.club
                wrote last edited by
                #12

                @faithisleaping @malcircuit I wish I could believe that it will eventually be proven to be bad. I'm afraid it's going to become a subliminal part of society and stick with us forever. Technologies have a tendency to do that no matter how harmful they are.

                Broadcasting brought us manufactured consent.
                Cable brought us cognitive overwhelm.
                Social media brought psyops to the individual.

                I'm afraid AI be around forever and destroy conceptual diversity.

                faithisleaping@anarres.familyF 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.club

                  @faithisleaping @malcircuit I wish I could believe that it will eventually be proven to be bad. I'm afraid it's going to become a subliminal part of society and stick with us forever. Technologies have a tendency to do that no matter how harmful they are.

                  Broadcasting brought us manufactured consent.
                  Cable brought us cognitive overwhelm.
                  Social media brought psyops to the individual.

                  I'm afraid AI be around forever and destroy conceptual diversity.

                  faithisleaping@anarres.familyF This user is from outside of this forum
                  faithisleaping@anarres.familyF This user is from outside of this forum
                  faithisleaping@anarres.family
                  wrote last edited by
                  #13

                  @sabrina @malcircuit It will likely be around forever in some form. We're not going to just shut it all down. Too many people have spent too much money.

                  But it will likely become part of the background noise that we learn to navigate.

                  But also, you say social media brought psyops to the individual but here we are talking on social media. It also brought human connection across continents.

                  Which isn't me saying that we should look for the silver lining to AI. It's pretty shit at 95% of what they're trying to use it for. I'm just pushing back a bit on the "technology is destroying everything" narrative. It's changing everything. It's destroying some things. Other things get created in its wake. Humanity will probably survive this one, too.

                  sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • malcircuit@thingy.socialM malcircuit@thingy.social

                    I should stop talking about AI. Like so many other social issues, I'm only preaching to the converted. All it does is remind people of Yet Another Bad Thing You Have No Power To Change.

                    Or to put it a different way, whatever levers you have available to influence the situation are probably already being pushed. Me reminding you doesn't do anything other than make you feel worse.

                    affekt@hachyderm.ioA This user is from outside of this forum
                    affekt@hachyderm.ioA This user is from outside of this forum
                    affekt@hachyderm.io
                    wrote last edited by
                    #14

                    @malcircuit this is partially true but also, if it makes you feel better to write about it and analyze it, then you should continue and people can ignore or block as needed. There's nothing wrong with preaching to the choir.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • malcircuit@thingy.socialM malcircuit@thingy.social

                      How many studies do researchers need to do before the threat of LLMs is taken seriously? This technology *might* have some useful niche applications, but widespread deployment will be a disaster for humanity.

                      This shit is an existential hazard, and not in the way the AI companies love to talk about. It's not going to take over the world like Skynet, it's a cognitohazard that turns anyone that interacts with it into an idiot.

                      Link Preview Image
                      Adults Lose Skills to AI. Children Never Build Them.

                      Discussions of cognitive offloading often miss a critical distinction: What AI does to a 45-year-old's brain is categorically different from what it does to a 14-year-old's.

                      favicon

                      Psychology Today (www.psychologytoday.com)

                      epic_null@infosec.exchangeE This user is from outside of this forum
                      epic_null@infosec.exchangeE This user is from outside of this forum
                      epic_null@infosec.exchange
                      wrote last edited by
                      #15

                      @malcircuit I propose tbis isn't "being taken seriously" because it's seen as a plus for individuals seeking control.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • malcircuit@thingy.socialM malcircuit@thingy.social

                        How many studies do researchers need to do before the threat of LLMs is taken seriously? This technology *might* have some useful niche applications, but widespread deployment will be a disaster for humanity.

                        This shit is an existential hazard, and not in the way the AI companies love to talk about. It's not going to take over the world like Skynet, it's a cognitohazard that turns anyone that interacts with it into an idiot.

                        Link Preview Image
                        Adults Lose Skills to AI. Children Never Build Them.

                        Discussions of cognitive offloading often miss a critical distinction: What AI does to a 45-year-old's brain is categorically different from what it does to a 14-year-old's.

                        favicon

                        Psychology Today (www.psychologytoday.com)

                        cyberlyra@hachyderm.ioC This user is from outside of this forum
                        cyberlyra@hachyderm.ioC This user is from outside of this forum
                        cyberlyra@hachyderm.io
                        wrote last edited by
                        #16

                        @malcircuit IDIOT MACHINES. I stand corrected -- there is one use for commercial AI!

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • faithisleaping@anarres.familyF faithisleaping@anarres.family

                          @sabrina @malcircuit It will likely be around forever in some form. We're not going to just shut it all down. Too many people have spent too much money.

                          But it will likely become part of the background noise that we learn to navigate.

                          But also, you say social media brought psyops to the individual but here we are talking on social media. It also brought human connection across continents.

                          Which isn't me saying that we should look for the silver lining to AI. It's pretty shit at 95% of what they're trying to use it for. I'm just pushing back a bit on the "technology is destroying everything" narrative. It's changing everything. It's destroying some things. Other things get created in its wake. Humanity will probably survive this one, too.

                          sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
                          sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
                          sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.club
                          wrote last edited by
                          #17

                          @faithisleaping @malcircuit Mostly I'm frustrated that we continue to dive into technology after technology without learning to moderate the harms. With AI we know a lot of the harms and we're still failing to moderate them. (I don't know how well we knew the harms of past technologies early in their use as well as we know the harms of AI this time.)

                          Intuitively I don't agree that technology is destroying everything. I don't want to make a "technology is destroying everything" argument. I also don't want to moderate my argument just because I don't want to be making that argument. I'd have to give more thought to what argument I want to make and how.

                          I definitely agree the technologies I chose have done more good than harm. I chose media technologies by accident, but since they go together...they have progressively increased the spread of culture and human connection and that's amazing.

                          And now I notice that my fear of the harm of AI is that it will undo that...flatten culture and erase human connection.

                          faithisleaping@anarres.familyF 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.club

                            @faithisleaping @malcircuit Mostly I'm frustrated that we continue to dive into technology after technology without learning to moderate the harms. With AI we know a lot of the harms and we're still failing to moderate them. (I don't know how well we knew the harms of past technologies early in their use as well as we know the harms of AI this time.)

                            Intuitively I don't agree that technology is destroying everything. I don't want to make a "technology is destroying everything" argument. I also don't want to moderate my argument just because I don't want to be making that argument. I'd have to give more thought to what argument I want to make and how.

                            I definitely agree the technologies I chose have done more good than harm. I chose media technologies by accident, but since they go together...they have progressively increased the spread of culture and human connection and that's amazing.

                            And now I notice that my fear of the harm of AI is that it will undo that...flatten culture and erase human connection.

                            faithisleaping@anarres.familyF This user is from outside of this forum
                            faithisleaping@anarres.familyF This user is from outside of this forum
                            faithisleaping@anarres.family
                            wrote last edited by
                            #18

                            @sabrina Yeah, and it absolutely is doing harm and it's absolutely a play by the rich and the powerful to control the thoughts of the masses.

                            There's a great quote from the classic Dr. Who episode The Green Death, where the doctor says something along the lines of,

                            Humans! Whenever they discover something new, the first thing they do is try to figure out how to kill each other with it, then how to make money off it, and only later do they study it to know whether or not it's safe.

                            I think about that quote a lot.

                            @malcircuit

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • faithisleaping@anarres.familyF faithisleaping@anarres.family

                              @sabrina @malcircuit It will likely be around forever in some form. We're not going to just shut it all down. Too many people have spent too much money.

                              But it will likely become part of the background noise that we learn to navigate.

                              But also, you say social media brought psyops to the individual but here we are talking on social media. It also brought human connection across continents.

                              Which isn't me saying that we should look for the silver lining to AI. It's pretty shit at 95% of what they're trying to use it for. I'm just pushing back a bit on the "technology is destroying everything" narrative. It's changing everything. It's destroying some things. Other things get created in its wake. Humanity will probably survive this one, too.

                              sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
                              sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
                              sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.club
                              wrote last edited by
                              #19

                              @faithisleaping @malcircuit I see the implicit argument now. Sorry, bad wording from a bad mood. I didn't mean to imply the world would be better off without those technologies.

                              I'm not so sure about AI. Hypothetically if we started from scratch and built it in a good ethical framework it would be fine. I don't think it can be redeemed as-is.

                              faithisleaping@anarres.familyF 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.clubS sabrina@fedi01.unicornsparkle.club

                                @faithisleaping @malcircuit I see the implicit argument now. Sorry, bad wording from a bad mood. I didn't mean to imply the world would be better off without those technologies.

                                I'm not so sure about AI. Hypothetically if we started from scratch and built it in a good ethical framework it would be fine. I don't think it can be redeemed as-is.

                                faithisleaping@anarres.familyF This user is from outside of this forum
                                faithisleaping@anarres.familyF This user is from outside of this forum
                                faithisleaping@anarres.family
                                wrote last edited by
                                #20

                                @sabrina I think the fundamental tech has some real and valuable applications. It's a huge jump in parallel compute power.

                                But LLMs just aren't it. They're cool and flashy but at the end of the day it's just a better markov chain and there's no real intelligence there. And thinking there is is just delusional. And, yeah, they can make pretty pictures, too, but pretty pictures aren't art and we need to stop thinking they are.

                                But if we used those data centers to study protein folding, maybe we could figure out better vaccines or something.

                                @malcircuit

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
                                Reply
                                • Reply as topic
                                Log in to reply
                                • Oldest to Newest
                                • Newest to Oldest
                                • Most Votes


                                • Login

                                • Login or register to search.
                                • First post
                                  Last post
                                0
                                • Categories
                                • Recent
                                • Tags
                                • Popular
                                • World
                                • Users
                                • Groups