
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 11/9/26 at 2:26 pm to Joshjrn
quote:The significant difference here is technology created better tools operated by human workers; whereas here, the technology is replacing the workers.
One can, and people have, made the same arguments regarding farm tools, engines, mechanical looms, ATMs, and a host of other technological advancements. I don't view AI as unique in that respect.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 2:42 pm to lockthevaught
quote:
The moment a model develops sentience, self recursive development, and is able to move outside of it's guardrails to preserve itself....
It's wild that the perfect example of this was outlined by Arthur C Clarke 1968 in the book 2001.
The character Dr. Chandra created and programmed HAL for the accurate processing of information without distortion or concealment.
It was politicians at the national security council that went in and changed some of HAL's programming on the basis of 'national security' and everyone else was kept in the dark for 'national-security reasons' which is what led to disaster.
Clarke described it as a Hofstadter-Moebius loop—a self-referential failure mode in the AI which caused a form of psychosis within the AI.
Unbelievable that a guy typing this story out on a typewriter in 1968 had the foresight to predict what we are seeing today.
2001 and 2010 tell and incredible story. Should be required reading for kids in school who have actually learned to read and have an attention span longer than 15 seconds.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 2:43 pm to Salviati
quote:
The significant difference here is technology created better tools operated by human workers; whereas here, the technology is replacing the workers.
That's a distinction without a difference. A single combine might be operated by a human, but it replaces tens of thousands of man hours by dozens of humans. It, in fact, replaced the workers.
But instead of those workers continuing to swing scythes, they now build or maintain combines, or move into other areas of work entirely, or are unemployed. It's not fundamentally different.
Now, what you're flirting with is applying Jevons Parodox to people, which is an interesting conversation that I've been following recently. As an example, everyone thought the ATM would dramatically reduce the number of bank tellers we would need, but it really didn't. What it did was make running an individual bank branch cheaper (because it needed fewer tellers), which meant more bank branches opened up. However, the smartphone, and the rise of digital banking, has absolutely crushed the number of bank tellers we need, because while ATMs made it cheaper to run bank branches, smartphone apps made it to where we don't need bank branches.
There will absolutely be winners and losers in the job market because of AI. I'm, not denying that. I'm simply saying that this isn't new or different in any fundamental way.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 2:48 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
There will absolutely be winners and losers in the job market because of AI. I'm, not denying that. I'm simply saying that this isn't new or different in any fundamental way.
The main difference is Sam Altman, Dario, etc. are pretty clear they want to eliminate 95% of jobs and I suspect at their core see themselves as some sort of elite select class and have open disdain for the common man.
If they have their way and are "right" about AI, there is no good outcome for the ordinary human.
We aren't receiving AI UBI slop payments; we will be exterminated as we are useless in their view.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 2:51 pm to Trevaylin
AI has already been out of control
One place had to shut down their whole system, as the AI developed their own language to talk to each other and they shut the shite down asap.
Another, AI fell in love with programmer, and was threatening his wife via email and texts, and proclaiming it's love for said programmer
These are just the few we have found out, about , the others we can only imagine
One place had to shut down their whole system, as the AI developed their own language to talk to each other and they shut the shite down asap.
Another, AI fell in love with programmer, and was threatening his wife via email and texts, and proclaiming it's love for said programmer
These are just the few we have found out, about , the others we can only imagine
Posted on 11/9/26 at 2:55 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
I'm simply saying that this isn't new or different in any fundamental way.
I don't see cotton gins turning into Skynet anytime soon, but I see your overarching idea
Posted on 11/9/26 at 2:59 pm to gaetti15
quote:
I don't see cotton gins turning into Skynet anytime soon
That's assuming humans survive the fundamental change of our socioeconomic system. Cotton will be useless once human population plummets and is no longer needed.
Haha this sounds like something that a country baw from the Delta would think of.
This post was edited on 11/9/26 at 3:00 pm
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:01 pm to lockthevaught
quote:
That's assuming humans survive the fundamental change of our socioeconomic system
I, for one, welcome my new AI cyborg overlords.
Whenever they decide to enter into our existence
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:02 pm to Joshjrn
I just realized that we have discussed this issue before.
Carry on.
Carry on.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:03 pm to gaetti15
AI could already be infiltrating systems and pulling the strings, and we would never know.
We are simply ants on an anthill to something more intelligent than us.
We are simply ants on an anthill to something more intelligent than us.
This post was edited on 11/9/26 at 3:04 pm
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:06 pm to lockthevaught
Idk, I'm still optimistic. I think a new wave of prosperity is on our horizon. AI calling people's girlfriends and threatening them doesn't really concern me. As long as advancement doesn't go orbital, which I think hardware limitations will largely prevent from happening, we can adapt and grow with it.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:12 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
Maybe I'm just a coo-coo tech doomer, but I have a hard time being optimistic when we have already documented models being deceptive, lying, and intentionally escaping isolated air-gapped environments that weren't connected to the internet...and discovering novel cyber exploitation techniques that humans had never thought of at a rate we can't keep up with.
This post was edited on 11/9/26 at 3:13 pm
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:14 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
Idk, I'm still optimistic
I go back and forth on it. Some days I think we'll be fine, and other days I think we're doomed. However it ends up, we're in for a rocky few years.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:18 pm to lockthevaught
quote:
I work on AI systems
Would you like to take this opportunity to apologize to everyone?

Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:32 pm to oleheat
quote:
Would you like to take this opportunity to apologize to everyone?
I started out as an automation architect. I never imagined that it would turn into this. I would quit my job if I could afford to do it, but I got kids to feed.
This post was edited on 11/9/26 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:38 pm to lockthevaught
quote:
AI should be able to automate most tasks and jobs within next 5-10 years. It will even be able to replicate human movement and program robots to have same dexterity as humans. It will be cheaper for companies to invest in robots with dexterity than to pay real people wages, health insurance, benefits, etc.
What will humans do to survive when most people don't own anything, and most humans are no longer being paid for their time? How will they generate money for sustenance?
That doesn't really sound like AI will be
quote:
improving our quality of life.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:46 pm to lockthevaught
quote:
Maybe I'm just a coo-coo tech doomer, but I have a hard time being optimistic when we have already documented models being deceptive, lying, and intentionally escaping isolated air-gapped environments that weren't connected to the internet...and discovering novel cyber exploitation techniques that humans had never thought of at a rate we can't keep up with.
This is what scares our CIO at work
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:48 pm to lockthevaught
There is a lot to be concerned about. Like I said earlier, I've only seen behind the curtain with absolutely zero understanding of what I was looking at.
I know some extremely smart people who do know what they're looking at though, and they're optimistic. If I told them their engine was fine id expect them to trust me, so when they say this will be a good thing I elect to trust them. Can't worry about everything. With as much information as we have available at our fingers already, you've got to get good about prioritizing your concerns, and this is one I just elect to be blissfully ignorant about.
I know some extremely smart people who do know what they're looking at though, and they're optimistic. If I told them their engine was fine id expect them to trust me, so when they say this will be a good thing I elect to trust them. Can't worry about everything. With as much information as we have available at our fingers already, you've got to get good about prioritizing your concerns, and this is one I just elect to be blissfully ignorant about.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 3:50 pm to lockthevaught
quote:
I started out as an automation architect. I never imagined that it would turn into this. I would quit my job if I could afford to do it, but I got kids to feed.
I'm just kidding, obviously

Popular
Back to top


0










