• Southern Boy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I bet in 10 years my insurance plan will no longer cover imaging being interpereted by a radiologist.

      That’s a very sharp prediction, thanks. I will run that by some people.

      • Zorque@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Considering how fractured medical billing is these days, often the techs contracted by your in-network doctors office are actually out-of-network.

        Isn’t medical billing fun?

          • Zorque@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s been a while since I’ve had supplementary procedures, so that’s good to know.

            Now I just have to wait for all nine (and a half) bills after emergency services.

        • Southern Boy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          The way claims get sent back during billing I became suspicious a lot of them are getting read by machine (and very poorly) during the first round of mail so don’t worry medical billing will get even more fun thanks to AI

      • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah this might actually not be that far from reality. Computer vision already did a large amount of the lifting, with the massive pushes towards AI, AI will take the rest of us plebians healthcare.

  • very_well_lost@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    254
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    It’s time to stop taking any CEO at their word.

    Edit: scratch that, the time to stop taking any CEO at their word was 100 years ago.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think the quote that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” is a bit older, and said about all the lessons of history before it.

      Somehow humanity doesn’t like the wisest rules out there. And prefers to read Palanick and talk about post-modernism instead of looking at the root.

    • Blackout@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The easiest way to stop him is to walk up to him and whisper into his ear “end computer similation” and he will just disappear.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          ehh as much as everybody loves this sentiment… at the end of the day, those days are over. going that route, you get Syria type shit.

          violence at this point is a red herring. there are ways to engage tho but it requires people to take personal responsibility improve their lives and show solidarity with like minded people and the under class. if critical mass ever hits this, things can change.

  • OutrageousUmpire@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    but for now, his approach is textbook Silicon Valley mythmaking

    The difference is that in this case it is not hype—it is reality. It’s not a myth, it is happening right now. We are chugging inevitably down the track to the most dramatic discovery in human history. And Altman’s views on solving the climate crisis, disease, nuclear fusion… they are all within reach. If anything we need to increase our speed to get us there ASAP.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Tell me honestly, are you a bot or do you sincerely believe this shit and based on which qualification and experience?

      Gunpowder, electricity, combustion engines, universal electronic computers, rocketry, lasers, plastics - none of these made any dramatic changes. It was all slow iterative process of fuzzy transitions and evolution.

      While these made pretty fundamental impacts. Sam Altman’s company is using fuckloads of data to calculate some predictive coefficients, and the rest of its product can be done by students.

      It’s just real-life power controllers trying their muscles at bending the tech industry with usual means - capturing resources and using them to assert control. There were no such resources in the beginning, and then datasets turned into something like oil.

      Generally in computing (when a computer is a universal machine) everyone able to program can do a lot of things. This makes the equality there kinda inconvenient for real life bosses who can call airstrikes and deal in oil tankers.

      There was the smart and slow way of killing that via slow oligopolization, but everyone can see how that doesn’t work well. Some people slowly move to better things, and some were fine with TV telling them how to live, they don’t even need Internet. All these technologies are still kinda modular and even transparent. And despite what many people think, both idealistic left and idealistic right build technologies for the same ultimate goal, so Fediverse is good and Nostr is good and everything that functions is good.

      So - that works, but human societies are actually developing some kind of immunity to centralized bot-poisoned platforms.

      To keep the stability of today’s elites (I’d say these are by now pretty international), you need something qualitatively different. A machine that is almost universal in solving tasks, but doesn’t give the user transparency. That’s their “AI”. And those enormous datasets and computing power are the biggest advantage of that kind of people over us. So they are using that advantage. That’s the kind of solution that they can do and we can’t.

      Simultaneously to that there’s a lot of AI hype being raised to try and replace normal computing with something reliant on those centralized supply chains. Hardware production was more distributed before the last couple of decades. Now there are a few well-controllable centers. They simply want to do the same with consumer software. Because if the consumers don’t need something, they won’t have that something when they see a need.

      All these aside, today’s kinds of mass surveillance can’t be done with (EDIT:without) something like that “AI”. There simply won’t be enough people to have sufficient control.

      So - there are a few notable traits of this approach converging on the same interest.

      It’s basically a project to conserve elites. The new generation of thieves and bureaucrats wants to become the new aristocracy.

      • daddy32@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re right. This is just “SaaS”, “cloud APIs” approach turned to 11 - making some thing unavailable to everyone unless they agree to agree with any conditions you come up in the future. For example, if Github Copilot becomes genuinely and uniquely very useful, that’s bad for the software development industry over the entire world: it means that every single software dev company will have to pay “tax” to Microsoft.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Also just gonna go with an old guard and say maybe Tom, once he sold Myspace he fucked right off. I think he has a travel blog or some shit.

        Though I wouldn’t consider him a tech bro.

  • ivanafterall ☑️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    You shouldn’t judge people on appearances.

    … but, I mean, come OOON… he looks like a reanimated Madame Tussaud’s sculpture. Like someone said, “Give me a Wish.com Mark Zuckerberg… but not so vivacious this time.” And he’s the CEO of an AI-related company.

  • MehBlah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t trust any of these types. If you haven’t noticed by now morally decent people are never in charge of a any large organization. The type of personality suited to claw their way to the top usually lack any real moral compass that doesn’t advance their pursuit of power.

  • sartalon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    When that major drama unfolded with him getting booted then re-hired. It was super fucking obvious that it was all about the money, the data, and the salesmanship He is nothing but a fucking tech-bro. Part Theranos, part Musk, part SBF, part (whatever that pharma asshat was), and all fucking douchebag.

    AI is fucking snake oil and an excuse to scrape every bit of data like it’s collecting every skin cell dropping off of you.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s not snake oil. It is a way to brute force some problems which it wasn’t possible to brute force before.

      And also it’s very useful for mass surveillance and war.

    • stringere@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 months ago

      Martin Shkreli is the scumbag’s name you’re looking for.

      From wikipedia: He was convicted of financial crimes for which he was sentenced to seven years in federal prison, being released on parole after roughly six and a half years in 2022, and was fined over 70 million dollars

    • Rogers@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I’d agree the first part but to say all Ai is snake oil is just untrue and out of touch. There are a lot of companies that throw “Ai” on literally anything and I can see how that is snake oil.

      But real innovative Ai, everything to protein folding to robotics is here to stay, good or bad. It’s already too valuable for governments to ignore. And Ai is improving at a rate that I think most are underestimating (faster than Moore’s law).

      • kaffiene@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think part of the difficulty with these discussions is that people mean all sorts of different things by “AI”. Much of the current usage is that AI = LLMs, which changes the debate quite a lot

        • Rogers@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          No doubt LLMs are not the end all be all. That said especially after seeing what the next gen ‘thinking models’ can do like o1 from ClosedAI OpenAI, even LLMs are going to get absurdly good. And they are getting faster and cheaper at a rate faster than my best optimistic guess 2 years ago; hell, even 6 months ago.

          Even if all progress stopped tomorrow on the software side the benefits from purpose built silicon for them would make them even cheaper and faster. And that purpose built hardware is coming very soon.

          Open models are about 4-6 months behind in quality but probably a lot closer (if not ahead) for small ~7b models that can be run on low/med end consumer hardware locally.

          • kaffiene@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            I don’t doubt they’ll get faster. What I wonder is whether they’ll ever stop being so inaccurate. I feel like that’s a structural feature of the model.

            • keegomatic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              May I ask how you’ve used LLMs so far? Because I hear that type of complaint from a lot of people who have tried to use them mainly to get answers to things, or maybe more broadly to replace their search engine, which is not what they’re best suited for, in my opinion.

                • keegomatic@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Personally, I’ve found that LLMs are best as discussion partners, to put it in the broadest terms possible. They do well for things you would use a human discussion partner for IRL.

                  • “I’ve written this thing. Criticize it as if you were the recipient/judge of that thing. How could it be improved?” (Then address its criticisms in your thing… it’s surprisingly good at revealing ways to make your “thing” better, in my experience)
                  • “I have this personal problem.” (Tell it to keep responses short. Have a natural conversation with it. This is best done spoken out loud if you are using ChatGPT; prevents you from overthinking responses, and forces you to keep the conversation moving. Takes fifteen minutes or more but you will end up with some good advice related to your situation nearly every time. I’ve used this to work out several things internally much better than just thinking on my own. A therapist would be better, but this is surprisingly good.)
                  • I’ve also had it be useful for various reasons to tell it to play a character as I describe, and then speak to the character in a pretend scenario to work out something related. Use your imagination for how this might be helpful to you. In this case, tell it to not ask you so many questions, and to only ask questions when the character would truly want to ask a question. Helps keep it more normal; otherwise (in the case of ChatGPT which I’m most familiar with) it will always end every response with a question. Often that’s useful, like in the previous example, but in this case it is not.
                  • etc.

                  For anything but criticism of something written, I find that the “spoken conversation” features are most useful. I use it a lot in the car during my commute.

                  For what it’s worth, in case this makes it sound like I’m a writer and my examples are only writing-related, I’m actually not a writer. I’m a software engineer. The first example can apply to writing an application or a proposal or whatever. Second is basically just therapy. Third is more abstract, and often about indirect self-improvement. There are plenty more things that are good for discussion partners, though. I’m sure anyone reading can come up with a few themselves.

  • kinsnik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    the techbros that think that with sufficiently advanced AI we could solve climate change are so stupid. like, we might not have a perfect solution, but we have ideas on how to start to make things better (less car-centric cities, less meat and animal products, more investment in public transport and solar), and it gets absolutely ignored. why would it be different when an AI gives the solution? unless they want the “eat fat-free food and you will be thin” solution to climate change, in which we change absolutely nothing of our current situation but it is magically ecological

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      There was a (fiction) book I was called “all the birds in the sky”. I really liked it. Highly recommend.

      One of the plot threads is a rich tech bro character that’s like “the world is doomed we need to abandon it for somewhere else. Better pour tons of resources into this sci-fi sounding project”. And I’m just screaming at the book “use that money for housing and transport and clean energy you absolute donkey”.

      There are a lot of well understood things we could be doing to make the world better, but they’re difficult for idiotic political reasons. Racism, nimbyism, emotional immaturity, etc.

    • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I don’t think you’re imagining the same thing they are when you hear the word “AI”. They’re not imagining a computer that prints out a new idea that is about as good as the ideas that humans have come up with. Even that would be amazing (it would mean that a computer could do science and engineering about as well as a human) but they’re imagining a computer that’s better than any human. Better at everything. It would be the end of the world as we know it, and perhaps the start of something much better. In any case, climate change wouldn’t be our problem anymore.

      • Eheran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s the thing, there could be a human 10’000x smarter than Einstein telling us what to do… And it would still not happen.

        • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I disagree with you, because a modern human could offer the people of the distant past (with their far less advanced technology) solutions to their problems which would seem miraculous to them. Things that they thought were impossible would be easy for the modern human. The computer may do the same for us, with a solution to climate change that would be, as you put it, magically ecological.

          With that said, the computer wouldn’t be giving humans suggestions. It would be the one in charge. Imagine a group of chimpanzees that somehow create a modern human. (Not a naked guy with nothing, but rather someone with all the knowledge we have now.) That human isn’t going to limit himself to answering questions for very long. This isn’t a perfect analogy because chimpanzees don’t comprehend language, but if a human with a brain just 3.5 times the size of a chimpanzee’s can do so much more than a chimpanzee, a computer with calculational capability orders of magnitude greater than a human’s could be a god compared to us. (The critical thing is to make it a loving god; humans haven’t been good to chimpanzees.)

          • OpenStars@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 months ago

            Imagine Jesus Christ as a time traveler, going back from a dying planet to just about the dawn of both roads and also safer sea travel than previously, those two connecting what would become the entire modern world.

            Jesus: like, forget all this “religion” crap about what foods to eat & where & when & with who, and like, just be excellent to one another dudes & dudettes

            Everyone since then, especially those who borrow His actual fucking name to label themselves: um… how about “no”?

  • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I wonder what this clowns daily PR budget is?

    Each one of these fake news stories are generally 15k a pop

    Do you remember when crypto scammer Sam Bankman was running thousands daily for years…

    Similar vibes here