@urlyman Probably. I am a proponent of AI/LLMs. I don't think we have the luxury of denying and turning our eyes away from them. So, I believe we need to be . The true problem is that we have to prevent the wealthy and oligarchs from controlling them. Competition from foreign sources is, as far as I can tell, our only hope. I have worked with them since the 90s. I left corporate America because funding for my AI project was pulled--saying AI would not amount to anything.

@_9CL7T9k8cjnD_ I don’t deny that focused, well-designed machine learning has utility, but I see the broad bundle of ‘AI’ as an accelerant on a culture of acceleration in an era of out-of-control overshoot.

I don’t see any prospect of that working out well. Nor of it not continuing to help funnel wealth to the already obscenely wealthy/powerful.

Ironically, this might help bring forward the scale of crash out of which course correction becomes possible. But not by design

@urlyman That's if one takes a strictly view. I would argue that the invention of writing or any of these transformational technologies is and was equally unprecedented in context. As with any transformation and technology there are positives and negatives. I will guarantee that if we do not accept our new context someone else in the world will develop it and use it to their ends and not ours.

1+ more replies (not shown)