anon-3988
Joined 3 years ago
Joined 3 years ago
So just let them spend their money and they will eventually fail and bankrupt, right?
> I mean, technically speaking, a video game from 1980 was likely to contain more logical branching points than a modern LLM's kernel, and was likely to be a lot more interesting to read.
Are you really saying that the "AI" in 1980 is _Really_ much more interesting than today's LLM? The author is either dishonest or ignorant.
Does anyone have an intuition to what causes it? What happens at these large scale (or very small)?
> Regulating gun ownership is exactly regulating the application. In your analogy, the gun is the AI. What you can do with the gun is the application.
From what I can tell, you are arguing that gun laws is reasonable.
> Different actors with different credentials in different contexts will have different requirements and permissions of what they can do with the technology, be it a gun or AI.
But this, is going against that, this is saying, "why should we ban AI or gun when they can be used for both good and bad. What we want is to ban bad, regardless of how it is achieved"
This? I am not commenting on this part. Hot take: I actually want Japan to stay Japan, I don't want Japan to turn into anything other than Japan. Its a good place to live in exactly because it is Japan. They don't have to change to accept more tourists, you have to change to be accepted by them.
No, I am not white, I am East Asian.