If the only justification for continued use of a tool is that it would be great in a hypothetical world where people don’t use it incorrectly, then there’s no justification for continued use of the tool.
I guess this is a philosophical issue, to me it works the other way round.
It’s not the tech that’s the issue, but it is broader democratic social organizational forms that need reform to make adoption of tech (LLM/genAI or other technology) or a wide range of other issues a lot more equitable.
LLM/ML tech is the future, it’s not like the crypto/NFT scams, not even close.
Butnit is. None of these companies are making any money. Are people going to pay whatnis required foe the frontier models to be profitable? And local is no where near on the same level.
In any size group of people there will be some who do one thing, and some who do something else. If you’re waiting for everyone to use AI correctly in order for its use to be worth it, you’ll be waiting forever. The statement is correct when it says that AI technically isn’t the main issue in and of itself - the issue is actually with humans as a species, but humanity isn’t going to change - there will always be a significant amount of people who use any given tool incorrectly.
When the genie costs an immense amount of money to use, and produces things that aren’t worth the cost, it doesn’t need to be put back- it will be abandoned once we realize we can’t make money off of it.
If the only justification for continued use of a tool is that it would be great in a hypothetical world where people don’t use it incorrectly, then there’s no justification for continued use of the tool.
I guess this is a philosophical issue, to me it works the other way round.
It’s not the tech that’s the issue, but it is broader democratic social organizational forms that need reform to make adoption of tech (LLM/genAI or other technology) or a wide range of other issues a lot more equitable.
LLM/ML tech is the future, it’s not like the crypto/NFT scams, not even close.
Butnit is. None of these companies are making any money. Are people going to pay whatnis required foe the frontier models to be profitable? And local is no where near on the same level.
In any size group of people there will be some who do one thing, and some who do something else. If you’re waiting for everyone to use AI correctly in order for its use to be worth it, you’ll be waiting forever. The statement is correct when it says that AI technically isn’t the main issue in and of itself - the issue is actually with humans as a species, but humanity isn’t going to change - there will always be a significant amount of people who use any given tool incorrectly.
This may be true, but forms of social organisation can and do change and improve.
It’s not possible to put the genie back into the bottle, so to speak, when it comes to technology.
When the genie costs an immense amount of money to use, and produces things that aren’t worth the cost, it doesn’t need to be put back- it will be abandoned once we realize we can’t make money off of it.