yes. hot take: this bullshit talk about sentience is also a way to trick government agencies into leaning into "a.i." regulation that staves off some imaginary singularity instead of, you know, actually regulating the horrible antisocial effects of bullshit "a.i." in the real world
The big existential issue caused by AI is unemployment. Shifting worry to future Hollywood scenarios conveniently evades that.
How can we survive without AI images of 6-fingered Tennesseeans hard at work collecting dew from the mountains to make tart & sweet refreshing soft drinks?
Reminder for everyone, the FTC is taking point on AI from the federal gov regulation side and you can see some of what they're working on their website: www.ftc.gov/industry/tec...
The official website of the Federal Trade Commission, protecting America’s consumers for over 100 years.
My state's official website has an AI assistant now. 💀
Government and the news. News orgs love to write stories about how crazy things will happen in the future, so feeding them shit about how AI might take over our lives is catnip which distracts from the very boring ways they're wrecking shit today.
ok old man going back to sleep now lol
I do get the sense that the people who will write very consequential AI policy are probably just waiting for a better show than WESTWORLD to help them put thoughts into words.
OK: "Let's make it illegal to build Skynet out of tinker-toys and an old iPod." Apparently Not OK: "Let's tell tech companies they have to pay fair value for the data they consume, and that people have a right to not give them that data in the first place."
It’s just a clunky thesaurus to me.