Artificial Intelligence (AI) and large language models are all the rage these days and their impact is often touted as changing the world of work in a truly revolutionary way aka lots of job losses are likely to result from this technology.
These chat-based programs gain their knowledge by absorbing huge amounts of data and use that data to generate information that is often but not always correct. The results are quite interesting and if you have not already done so I would encourage you to start a conversation with one of these bots. The technology goes beyond texting however and can extend to generating pictures and even videos from simple prompts. In the next few years expect to see more and more AI generate pictures and even videos. You can possibly see which jobs are at risk just based on my descriptions and what nefarious uses this technology can be used for.
Anyhow, this thread will be dedicated to issues such as ChatGPT or other such programs and their potential issues they pose in the immediate future.
In the article I got linked up it goes on about the vast amount of energy required to power the various AI farms that have sprung to power these latest AI technologies. It sounds extreme, but due to sheer amount of electrical energy required there is a suggestion of powering future AI farms with nuclear energy.
Future data centres may have built-in nuclear reactors (BBC) (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68238330)
By Michael Dempsey
Technology reporter
A man with a shiny metal Concorde model on his desk, and old circuit boards on a shelf, is clearly in love with technology.
Chris Sharp is the chief technology officer at Digital Realty, a US business at the intersection of construction and high-tech. It builds data centres, the anonymous warehouses full of computers that keep the online world spinning.
And the advent of artificial intelligence (AI), which requires far more processing power than standard computing, has put rocket boosters under the data centre world.
His company has just built a huge new data centre in Portland, Oregon dedicated to AI. Just how different is this from an ordinary data centre?
"A normal data centre needs 32 megawatts of power flowing into the building. For an AI data centre it's 80 megawatts," says Mr Sharp.
AI systems are using all this extra electricity simply because they are doing so much more processing than standard computing. They are chewing through far more data.
Mr Sharp also points out that the entire web of technical support demanded by AI is greater. "You have five times more cabling, for instance."
A technician at a data centre in ChinaImage source, Getty Images
Image caption,
Data centres already used huge amounts of electricity, but AI is significantly increasing their power consumption
All of this points to a problem. How can AI grow when it requires so much more power to function?
Demanding ever more juice from the existing grid means competing with homes and other industries, and is not going to win the data centre sector any friends if blackouts result.
"Our industry has to find another source of power," Mr Sharp declares. He reckons that is nuclear.
More pressingly, he predicts that data centres in the not too distant future will come with their own dedicated, built-in nuclear reactors.
The technology in question is the much-touted Small Modular Reactor (SMR). These are designs for advanced reactors with about a third of the power generation of a traditional, large nuclear plant.
While there are currently no SMRs in commercial operation around the world, China is building the world's first, and similar technology is already used by nuclear-powered submarines.
Meanwhile, universities, such as the UK's Imperial College London, have for years operated small nuclear reactors for teaching and training purposes. Imperial's own reactor, located just outside London, was operational from 1965 to 2010.
The core module of China's forthcoming commercial SMR being transported last summerImage source, Getty
Today most companies developing SMRs for commercial use are focusing on helping towns and cities to keep their lights on. However, a clutch of specialist firms have decided that data centres are the best candidates for their SMR designs.
Dr Michael Bluck runs the Centre for Nuclear Engineering at Imperial College London. "Data centres are power hungry things, but with AI we're moving into a new level of power requirements," he says.
"There are about 50 SMR designs out there. The challenge is to build them in repeatable units, factory style, standardising production lines.
"There's no reason why a small fast reactor can't power a data centre, except that you have to get it past the regulator."
In the US, one SMR design from a company called NuScale has already been given the go-ahead by the Office of Nuclear Energy. Meanwhile, in the UK the Office for Nuclear Regulation is continuing to study SMR designs from Rolls-Royce and US tech firm Holtec International.
And US energy firm Westinghouse wants to build four SMRs in north east England, in Tees Valley, close to the existing Hartlepool nuclear power station.
Banner around links to stories about AI
Read additional stories on artificial intelligence
Banner around links to stories about AI
Dr Bluck thinks nuclear submarines offer a compelling safety case for SMR technology. "We build a reactor and put it in a submarine, and people sleep within two yards of it."
And he forecasts the tech sector's involvement in SMR development will prove decisive. "These guys have got oodles of cash!"
By contrast, Dr Doug Parr, chief scientist for Greenpeace UK, says that the high cost of SMRs will prove to be too great a barrier.
Unrealistic hype lies behind the cost estimates for SMRs," he says. "This hype will fall away as delays and difficulties emerge."
Dr Parr argues that data centre operators will get cold feet when revised costings emerge to render SMRs uncompetitive compared with renewable energy sources.
Greenpeace is also opposed to nuclear power on safety grounds, pointing out the risk of accidents, and the need to deal with the radioactive waste.
Spencer Lamb, chief commercial officer at British data centre developer Kao Data, doesn't view nuclear-powered facilities in the UK as being something imminent. "I've heard about SMRs, but it will take a long time to deploy a nuclear-configured data centre in the UK, and AI is happening now," he says.
Back in California, a company called Oklo says it has an SMR design that is almost ready to roll.
"AI is the catalyst, the main driver," says Brian Gitt, who is in charge of business development at the company.
Oklo plans to manufacture SMRs that it says can built both quickly and safely.
"People question the viability of nuclear power due to the waste product and risk of an accident," says Mr Gitt. "We recycle the fuel through our reactor multiple times, dealing with the waste, and the new reactors cannot melt-down, they are self-cooling and self-regulating."
An artist's impression of the exterior of an Oklo SMR and data centreImage source, Oklo
Image caption,
Oklo's designs for its planned SMRs appear to be going for more whimsy charm than your typical power station
Mr Gitt declines to reveal if any data centre firms have already signed contracts, but he says that "all the major operators are interested". He adds: "Power is their biggest problem, and they want to deploy this technology within four years, by 2028."
Mr Gitt says that his 25 years working in the energy business has convinced him that nuclear power is the only answer to the pressures the new AI data centre world faces.
"[Without us] they just don't have the power to turn on all the machines they need to have. We are signing letters of intent on specific data centre locations for the 2028 timeframe."
So what will a data centre's very own nuclear plant look like? Oklo envisages a large stainless steel tank that contains the SMR dropped into a 50ft (15m) deep hole in the ground. The data centre would then constructed on and around it.
Perhaps the ultimate tie up between SMRs, AI and data centres is evident on Oklo's board.
Sam Altman, the high profile leader of leading AI firm OpenAI has been its chairman since 2015. As Mr Gitt says of Mr Altman, "he identified this issue 10 years ago."
Thoughts anyone?
Your article turned into an article about nuclear power. But it started off on topic.
The is a group of doomers I would love to introduce the Diner to. I published this in another thread today.
I like the way they split the screen and the grid layout for the participants. The right side of the layout was used to show info from chatGPT about the discussion as it progressed. This must be chatGPT 4.0. I use the free version 3.0. Which is wrong as often as it is right.
I shudder to think of the power I have used with certain questions I have asked.
Will it put people out of jobs?
No, but capitalism will.
Sadly, even the Black Widow probably can't stop AI from consuming still more Terawatts of power and infiltrating our existence, but she may at least slow it down a little.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/05/22/scarlett-johansson-sam-altmans-washington-00159507
Sam Altman's Scarlett Johansson Blunder Just Made AI a Harder Sell in DC
RE
They don't have enough Juice to keep the lights on reliably in Kenya, but the Big Gorilla will build a Geothermal plant just to power his Supercomputer AI farm there.
On the plus side, Come the Revolution, they could Nationalize the power plant, unplug the supercomputers and turn the lights back on.
https://africa.businessinsider.com/local/markets/microsoft-to-build-dollar1-bn-geothermal-data-centre-in-kenya-following-nigeria/52bsqm5
Microsoft to build $1 bn geothermal data centre in Kenya following Nigeria facility closure
RE
Billionaires want AI, they just don't wanna pay for all the juice it takes to run the computers. Somebody else should take the risk.
Who is out there demanding we have AI Data Centers? Just tell the Billionaires, "You want this, you power it." Has anybody seen any demonstrable improvement in their life from AI? Most of the consequences so far seem to have been bad rather than good. Deep Fakes and lost jobs for instance.
I see no pressing need for AI, and I certainly can't see why taxpayers would want to foot the bill. Electric companies who might profit from it might want t, but they're already way behind on being able to supply power, so why do they want another headache?
https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/energy-power-supply/big-tech-wants-nuclear-power-but-doesn-t-see-role-as-investor
RE
Quote from: RE on Jun 18, 2024, 12:51 PMBillionaires want AI, they just don't wanna pay for all the juice it takes to run the computers. Somebody else should take the risk.
Who is out there demanding we have AI Data Centers? Just tell the Billionaires, "You want this, you power it." Has anybody seen any demonstrable improvement in their life from AI? Most of the consequences so far seem to have been bad rather than good. Deep Fakes and lost jobs for instance.
I see no pressing need for AI, and I certainly can't see why taxpayers would want to foot the bill. Electric companies who might profit from it might want t, but they're already way behind on being able to supply power, so why do they want another headache?
https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/energy-power-supply/big-tech-wants-nuclear-power-but-doesn-t-see-role-as-investor
RE
QuoteI see no pressing need for AI,
All the talk now is hype. A.I. was a dream and progress was painfully slow. Anybody into computer science knows this. Finally enough progress was made to get useful results. But what kind of results really?
A circular saw is a great tool if you have a wall plug to plug the cord into. It is superior to a hand saw in many ways. Even so it is not a perfect replacement, and at the end of the day the power saw is only a tool that gets a job done. A wooden chair is a wooden chair is a wooden chair. Power magic is not transferred to a product. Power only makes production easier. And A.I. has to be told what to do.
Besides not being magic, A.I. right now is like a precocious ten year old that has just consumed five candy bars and has been told to sit still. Superior in many ways to humans, A.I. has serious shortcomings, and it will have a maturity issue for quite some time.
As for putting people out of work. That is a function of the system, not technology. Ask a true Luddite. We don't hate technology. We only hate technology stolen into private hands!
The private hands seem to be a problem.
Quote from: K-Dog on Jun 19, 2024, 01:11 AMThe private hands seem to be a problem.
Private or Public, it consumes too much power.
RE
Quote from: RE on Jun 19, 2024, 09:07 AMQuote from: K-Dog on Jun 19, 2024, 01:11 AMThe private hands seem to be a problem.
Private or Public, it consumes too much power.
RE
The public forced by common ownership to deal with reality could vote to limit profligate use to University Research. All you get from private is chaos.
Could does not mean would, but it would be POSSIBLE. With private it is impossible.
Start counting the job losses.
Might be a good time to break some looms.
(https://assets1.cbsnewsstatic.com/hub/i/r/2018/03/10/2c74f509-2406-49bb-be00-577652fa4522/thumbnail/1200x630/9104e74420211d5a439314df9006614c/luddites-promo-295918.jpg?v=5842509bb796a146f9b20d3e8b03dac6)
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/20/business/ai-jobs-workers-replacing/index.html
RE
"We want data centers, but it can't be the Wild Wild West of data centers and crypto miners crashing our grid and turning the lights off."
"We" do? Who is the we here? Have they done a referendum asking people if they want a new Data Center in the neighborhood causing more frequent power blackouts and raising the rates on their electricity? Everybody Knows we don't have enough power generation capacity to handle what the Billionaires have planned for us, but "we" want them so "we" have to pay for them.
And while big tech firms may be committed to using green energy, the Washington Post reports that, since they run on the same grid as typical power consumers, these data centers tend to eat up much of the renewable energy available, leaving power providers to source dirty energy to fill in gaps.
WHY do they run on the same grid? Let them build their own fucking grid! Put some solar panels on the fucking roof! Power it with Green Hydrogen fuel cells! Build a Fusion Reactor next door!
https://www.salon.com/2024/06/22/power-hungry-ai-boom-making-power-grids-dirtier-less-reliable/
RE
You can see here why Capitalism makes reducing power consumption impossible.
Tech companies build a data center wherever there's a power company that says they can sell them juice. Since the more juice they sell the more money they make, they all say, "Surre! Build it here!"
Once built, on those hot days they find they're short of juice, so they buy some from the grid. Somebody somewhere fires up an old coal plant to make up the shortfall.
Regulations need to be put in place that require AI to have its own power supply independent of grid power. Without that, the consumption will rise faster than renewables could power it. True anyhow, but it would at least slow it down
https://cleantechnica.com/2024/06/24/weird-wacky-ways-of-powering-data-centers-are-under-consideration/
RE
The tech sector's build out of data centers to support AI and the adoption of electric vehicles alone is expected to add 290 terawatt hours of electricity demand by the end of the decade, according to a report released by the consulting firm Rystad Energy this week.
Must...have...MOAR POWER!
Supplying the demand with reliable power is a matter of economic and national security, Womack said. Southern expects 80% of the demand through the end of the decade to be met by renewables, he said.
Which means that 20% more FF powered plants will be necessary as well, without retiring any of the currently running plants. IOW, all of the added renewables does nothing to reduce carbon emissions at all, it just gets worse.
Opposite the banksters who see no solution to lack of affordable housing because of insufficient supply, the economistas tell us we must build terawatts of new power generation to feed the insatiable lust of billionaires for electricity. Power for computers must be found...housing for the homeless cannot be. The hypocrisy of capitalists laid bare for all to see. If they put half the investment they are making into data centers into affordable housing, the homeless crisis would be over inside of 5 years.
Still, not a single politician from any party including the minority parties has stood up to point this out and demand an immediate national affordable housing act. Make a law that for every dollar Google spends on building data centers they have to match with a dollar spent on new housing. All the housing and data center to be powered by the renewable energy plant they also have to finance.
Why is there nobody who will suggest this in any state assembly if not in CONgress? Is there not 1 in the whole FSoA who can see the OBVIOUS? Where is Captain Obvious when you need him?
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/43/9e/10/439e106e9d653bb3fd0a664fa9044581.gif)
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/30/failure-to-meet-surging-energy-demand-will-jeopardize-economic-growth-utility-execs-warn.html
RE
I read an article this morning about how much energy it takes to run the AI programs. I will give examples in the article that convinced me to start using Duck, Duck, Go instead. I can't take part in the tremendous carbon footprint it is having right now. Maybe sometime in the future if they can bring the footprint WAY DOWN, but for now I can't use it with a clear conscience.
Today data centers run 24/7 and most derive their energy from fossil fuels, although there are increasing efforts to use renewable energy resources. Because of the energy the world's data centers consume, they account for 2.5 to 3.7 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, exceeding even those of the aviation industry.
In 2021, global data center electricity use was about 0.9 to 1.3 percent of global electricity demand. One study estimated it could increase to 1.86 percent by 2030. As the capabilities and complexity of AI models rapidly increase over the next few years, their processing and energy consumption needs will too. One research company predicted that by 2028, there will be a four-fold improvement in computing performance, and a 50-fold increase in processing workloads due to increased use, more demanding queries, and more sophisticated models with many more parameters. It's estimated that the energy consumption of data centers on the European continent will grow 28 percent by 2030.
In 2019, University of Massachusetts Amherst researchers trained several large language models and found that training a single AI model can emit over 626,000 pounds of CO2, equivalent to the emissions of five cars over their lifetimes.
A more recent study reported that training GPT-3 with 175 billion parameters consumed 1287 MWh of electricity, and resulted in carbon emissions of 502 metric tons of carbon, equivalent to driving 112 gasoline powered cars for a year.
Once models are deployed, inference—the mode where the AI makes predictions about new data and responds to queries—may consume even more energy than training. Google estimated that of the energy used in AI for training and inference, 60 percent goes towards inference, and 40 percent for training. GPT-3's daily carbon footprint was been estimated to be equivalent to 50 pounds of CO2 or 8.4 tons of CO2 in a year.
Inference energy consumption is high because while training is usually done multiple times to keep models current and optimized, inference is used many many times to serve millions of users. Two months after its launch, ChatGPT had 100 million active users. Instead of employing existing web searches that rely on smaller AI models, many people are eager to use AI for everything, but a single request in ChatGPT can consume 100 times more energy than one Google search, according to one tech expert.
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2023/06/09/ais-growing-carbon-footprint/
Will be interesting to see how the court rules on this one. Will Bezos get a free ride on the backs of the residential customers? Place your bets here.
https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/03/utility_firms_launch_complaint/
RE
Good catch. The energy wars will really get going now. Climate disasters plus, data centers are going to be fighting for energy. Scarcity in so many sectors now will also bring things to a boil. Fun times. :)
Power companies love AI. Not too good for J6P though.
"Expect lower reliability and higher costs for consumers, while energy producers might make more money on the supply side by producing less energy but being paid to exist," he said.
The ultimate TBTF company!
On the plus side, you'll be able to complain to dead movie stars about your electric bill on the phone.
https://www.investors.com/news/artificial-intelligence-ai-data-centers-demand-nuclear-energy/?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAqEAgAKgcICjDOm4YLMJD1gwMw5ZOJAw&utm_content=rundown&gaa_at=la&gaa_n=AWsEHT6Zc83B-2qbHQo3Qp71Q5tNBqyxEBq9L2urMtey1ZHe0BxQQkiK41qjZ4xtWTnLA_O2HzOsa2tC3xBF&gaa_ts=6692b635&gaa_sig=kVbCY4qa1iCCj4X-DCVFx5TN1pinFUX4s8VxpxwlstFPmuW815EWPmE_f6W66BnOMHeIh9Z0Av27hf5wGSPhVg%3D%3D
RE
Quote from: RE on Jun 18, 2024, 12:51 PMBillionaires want AI, they just don't wanna pay for all the juice it takes to run the computers. Somebody else should take the risk.
Who is out there demanding we have AI Data Centers? Just tell the Billionaires, "You want this, you power it." Has anybody seen any demonstrable improvement in their life from AI? Most of the consequences so far seem to have been bad rather than good. Deep Fakes and lost jobs for instance.
I see no pressing need for AI, and I certainly can't see why taxpayers would want to foot the bill. Electric companies who might profit from it might want t, but they're already way behind on being able to supply power, so why do they want another headache?
https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/energy-power-supply/big-tech-wants-nuclear-power-but-doesn-t-see-role-as-investor
RE
Telling billionaires to go build their own has worked so well in building municipal stadiums, hasn't it? New York State has committed to funding $600 million of the $1.4 billion stadium project in Buffalo, with the NFL and the Bills investing $550 million and Erie County $250 million. The new stadium will be owned by the state rather than the county, as is currently the case.
Framed a different way, taxpayers will pay $850 million of the construction cost (with $600 million coming from New York State and $250 million coming from Erie County). With the State of New York also paying for all maintenance and repair costs once the stadium opens. Always good to be a billionaire. The first rule of being a billionaire is never put your own capital at risk.
Expect much the same with nukes for AI.
Texas Leaders Worry That Bitcoin Mines Threaten to Crash the State Power Grid
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/10072024/texas-bitcoin-mining-threatens-power-grid/
Love this quote ;D :
When I used to give career advice to my MBAs, I joked that going into tech is like becoming a stripper—you make a lot when you're young, but it goes down fast. Even today you can find former senior programmers driving an Uber or mowing lawns, aged out of a fast-changing industry.
There's a half million people whose Amerikan Dream has become a nightmare. Those are folks with 6 figure incomes and hefty mortgages which won't get paid on a salary stacking the shelves at Harbor Freight.
Irony is it's those same programmers who wrote the code behind AI. They coded themselves right out of a job.
Big Tech Cuts Half a Million Jobs, Blames AI
https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/07/24/big-teach-cuts-half-a-million-jobs-blames-ai/
RE
https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/07/24/big-teach-cuts-half-a-million-jobs-blames-ai/ (https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/07/24/big-teach-cuts-half-a-million-jobs-blames-ai/)
QuoteOf course, AI has its own problems, including hallucinations that invent information and phenomena that don't exist. Google pulled an AI blunder after it assured users that cockroaches living in a penis is totally normal, indeed that's how they got their name.
This article is light on facts and is presenting speculation as data. I quote this single paragraph to show the contradiction, and other problems with AI were cited. It makes it look like the author is vetting 'facts' the author actually knows to be made up. The author admits AI has problems. The truth is, at least for this year. Is that only domain experts can use AI. Programmers can use it to write a better program. Only programmers can ask the right questions to refine results, and results have to be refined up the ying-yang. Only a doctor can use AI to properly diagnose a disease. Only a domain expert can tell if results are bullshit or not. Currently AI generates more bullshit than a bull.
Regarding code. AI can now teach anyone to program. All they have to do is spend the time to learn. Ask it questions and practice.
In other words. Nothing has changed. AI replaced the book. You can now do proper book lernin without a book if you have the money to pay for AI, and you have a computer. Free AI only gets you so far before your 'limit' is up.
If you want to know why tech companies have cut jobs, cutting jobs happens to be a FEATURE of capitalism. It is ALWAYS done where it can be done to maintain the army of unemployed and increase PROFITS. Maintaining an unemployed army is essential for profits. Capitalism fails without it. For real.
This article was written to hook you by fear.
* A new user can easily get an uncooperative AI session to take far longer to give results than if the user did the work themselves. If useful results are produced at all. A new user will want to tell AI to fuck itself in frustration. And that is a total waste of time. And hard on the keyboard.
Quote from: K-Dog on Jul 26, 2024, 11:12 AMIf you want to know why tech companies have cut jobs, cutting jobs happens to be a FEATURE of capitalism. It is ALWAYS done where it can be done to maintain the army of unemployed and increase PROFITS. Maintaining an unemployed army is essential for profits. Capitalism fails without it. For real.
Of course. The point is though that AI enables them to fire the humans because the AI enables fewer code jockeys to write code faster. So the department that once had 20 EEs writing subroutines now has 5 using ChatGPT getting it done. The irony is that the same guys just fired probably wrote some of the code behind the AI.
RE
Good point. I forget I only do it for fun.
It seems that humans have become what they are ( that distinguishes them from "animals" ) by the use of tools. Most of the purpose of the inner dialogue is to scrounge for the means ( tool ) to make our labor to survive more efficent...to accomplish our goals. There has always been problems in the society when new tools are invented. Now we have invented tools that are destroying our environment in about everything we do. AI represents a tool that will slowly cull the overpopulation problem. As the means of production takes away the contracts for labor, people will die earlier, and will quit having as many children. We are in an era of collapse. Big collapse. AI will speed the process exponentially.
It was so cool when a Microsoft update crashed the system for millions of people here lately. Microsoft is a powerful symbol for the development of the computing tool. It was conceived in a war with Apple. The programming involved to compete with Apple, using the DOS system has been a nightmare, and yet it is the go to programming language. I wonder if we had chose Unix to build the internet and other computing tools, with using open source, if we would have such a cluster fuck? The accumulation of material wealth has driven the development of this tool, not the excellence it could be used to benefit humankind. Like most all structures of modern society AI is a mess that will constantly be a problem. I see AI as running parallel with other means of collapse. It was inevitable that it would manifest. The scale of it's influence is huge so it will have huge implications of collapsing a functioning society.
Until/If mankind evolves to understand that the tools that are made are to be in harmony with nature then there is a chance that this specie will continue. If not, it will go extinct.
The chance of something dramatic happening makes AI interesting.
'
Video Game Takes Over Universe.' Now we will have full on automatic space communism. Whoopie!
AI grabs your attention, but actually AI is only a tool. At first glance a tool to offset the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. From that point of view, just another tool in a long line of many. Is that a good thing? Or have the rich been selfish and kept productivity improvements to themselves?
Yes they have. In America since 1979 wages have been flat while productivity improvements increase owner income every year.
Uncle Karl sez: The value of a commodity is the median amount of labor that is socially necessary to produce a commodity. The first order effect of a productivity improvement is to increase physical productivity and profits, but as demand does not change, a second order effect will, (as the improvement becomes the universal way to do things), reduce profit. What goes up later comes down. Profit goes back to where it was with workers getting a smaller slice of pie.
In America workers were getting a piece of the ever bigger pie from 1948 to 1980 until this:
QuoteStarting in the late 1970s policymakers began dismantling all the policy bulwarks helping to ensure that typical workers' wages grew with productivity. Excess unemployment was tolerated to keep any chance of inflation in check. Raises in the federal minimum wage became smaller and rarer. Labor law failed to keep pace with growing employer hostility toward unions. Tax rates on top incomes were lowered. And anti-worker deregulatory pushes—from the deregulation of the trucking and airline industries to the retreat of anti-trust policy to the dismantling of financial regulations and more—succeeded again and again.
Then all the extra pie went elsewhere.
Capitalism has serious flaws, second order effects which offset any benefit it gives. As a force in society capitalism must be regulated or eliminated. Technology is not the problem. People are. AI is another means of production, and really that is all AI is. Who owns it. That is what counts.
* Carbon fee and dividend would give ownership of oil and gas to the American people making the oil companies employees of us. But so complete is the brainwashing of America, few people understand how this could be a good idea and change the
game everything.
Consequently nothing will change. America has a religious commitment to being owned.
QuoteI wonder if we had chose Unix to build the internet and other computing tools, with using open source
Actually that is what we have. The issue becomes who owns it. My opinion is that Google and Amazon owns it by proxy for the deep state. I have strong opinions on the subject. Personal experience.
The F.S.O.A.loves monopoly ownership. Monopolies are a means of control one step away from accountability. Fascism merges the state with capitalism, it is a defining characteristic.
Did Amazon or the White House ban Caleb's book. You have to take a deep breath to answer the question. That is the point.
You know the answer, but you can't bet on it.
Quote from: K-Dog on Jul 27, 2024, 09:37 AMTechnology is not the problem.
Technology always has blowback. Extending the lifespan with modern medicine has helped create the overshoot and a population of geriatrics. Fertilizers and the "green revolution" also led to overshoot. Cars and planes brought climate change. Nuclear energy brought the atom bomb and Chernobyl. Chemistry brought us "forever chemicals" and microplastics in the food chain. The computer enabled increased surveillance and control of the population even without AI.
There is no technology that is free of negative consequences, and the more powerful the tech, the worse the consequences. You can postulate "if Homo Saps had the WISDOM to use it correctly, it would be good", but fact is HS does not possess that wisdom. Beyond just being stupid and shortsighted, there are always truly EVIL people who find nefarious uses for technology.
Even just the invention of Agriculture had negative blowback. It led to the stratification of society, the development of a military caste and millenia of perpetual state sponsored war.
Tecchnology may not be
"the" problem, but it definitely is
A problem. As a species, we did way better with basic technology and simple tools. We have the intelligence to invent cool stuff, we do not posess the wisdom to use it without causing worse problems than it was meant to fix.
RE
Yes, consequences are not considered. People use technology first and ask questions later sometimes maybe.
It is a vicious circle. New tech to replace old tech in a spiral to death when consequences of old tech can no longer be solved by new tech.