wallfacer

One core assertion seems less true every day:

> The intelligence (knowing what a "risk" actually means) still requires human governance.

Less and less. Why do you trust a human who’s considered 5000 assessments to better understand “risks” and process the next 50 better than the LLM who has internalized untold millions of assessments?

Why can’t they make a custom menu of my most used buttons? That would be real user customization, not a reel of my top listened songs. Or better still, let me make my own Player layout.

Today, I find the UI downgrade buries Offline, Playback, Settings, One more layer deeper, behind a circle that has the first letter of my username.

It is not substantiated that all desires arise from an associated, achievable need.

I need food so I desire food and I eat to satisfy it.

I desire to have perfect love and relationships, but can’t seem to achieve it.

But if I cannot find a perfect slice of pizza, g-d exists and another world follows this one where the pizza is truly satisfying?

Believe whatever you like, but realize Faith is required for this to follow that. Logic won’t do it for you alone.

The entire argument follows from a single incredible, unsubstantiated assumption, that “creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists.”

If the top ten takeaways are ok using incredibly vaporous, non-sensical phrasing why would I dig any deeper?

“the number of AI incidents and controversies has increased 26 times since 2012”

Ok but how many “incidents,” also detectably fake deepfakes and call-monitoring inmates are top examples of misuse? Naive.

“BLOOM’s training run emitted 25 times more carbon than a single air traveler on a one-way trip from New York to San Francisco”

What does this mean? That sounds like a very small amount to me but the conclusion is that’s a huge environmental impact. No, I read, for the carbon cost of decommissioning one old jet, we can have a new LLM.

If any Spotify devs are here, please let me explore and add songs, artists and albums to my library without “hearting” it.

I often just want to follow up later by “adding to my library,” and it feels weird to “LOVE” it before ever hearing it. I really feel pain when I hear something terrible that I’ve already “liked” and consider the impacts to my algorithm.

Please distinguish between “like” and “save.”

A simple “plus sign” or really any other symbol that signifies “adding to a collection” without “liking” connotations (stars are out too).

Qualitative data can be valuable data, even in this quantitative age.

Tough choice between Soap and hot takes on HN :P

However, near-instant access to the entirety of humanities’ collective information vs a dishwasher? I’m fine washing dishes by hand.

Mapping a novel virus genome and formulating an RNA-based vaccine in mere weeks vs “look how many dams and bridges we can build”?

You know what happens when you compound incremental progress? Huge advancements.

Progress is real, and it’s only getting faster as exponential tech from the past few decades is just now hitting “whole numbers” and converging.

Of course, it’s not fundamentally inevitable, but the future is decided by the possible-ists.

Please take the time to read the latest works by Diamandis and Kotler, Kevin Kelly, Steven Pinker, and Harari.

I cannot imagine your perspective will still be the same after so much history, theory, and real-world examples beyond the point by point counters you’re receiving as replies.

Yes, these are also not exclusive and many jobs evolve, of course. If you think up something people want and build it, you might then spend time improving it. Or you might let others do that while you go back and build something new again.

You get to choose what you do. And as another commenter suggested you get to choose your values too.

Use your time.

I’m a person who finds out what I’m thinking as I speak. Iterating towards an idea with confidence in each turn. Even if you end up in the vicinity of where you started, problem not actually solved, you demonstrate how you move through problem space.

Similar to another comment I read comparing interviews to athletic tryouts and competition, which tries to assess how a body moves through physical space.