TechTakes
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
That means that the harm done by these systems compound the more widely they are used as errors pile up at every stage of work, in every sector of the economy. It builds up an ambient radiation of system variability and errors that magnifies every other systemic issue with the modern state and economy.
Wanted to shout these two sentences out in particular. Best summary of my biggest current fears regarding use of "ai"/llm/transformer(?)-based systems.
Amazon Prime pulling some AI bullshit with, considering the bank robbery in the movie was to pay for surgery for a trans woman, a hint of transphobia (or more likely, not a hint, just the full reason).
I've been listening to faster and worse (see https://awful.systems/comment/6216748 ) and I like it so I wanted to give it ups.
(I think this and the memory palace are the only micro podcasts I've listened to. idk why it isn't a more common format)
thanks! It might be uncommon because it's a real pain in the ass to keep it short. Every time I make one I stress about how easily my point can be misunderstood because there are so few details. Good way to practice the art of moving on
if it's any reassurance, i've understood all your points perfectly! you're basically making an argument for all UI to be more apple-like
holy shit, I really don't know if this is real or a joke
:)
EDIT: ok it was a joke
really, thanks for listening! It's fun making them and nice to know they are being listened to
this is also why pivot to AI is mostly 200-250 words, not 1200 or 2000 or 8000
It's probably more sensible for me to try writing short bits too, instead of faffing around with videos
The most naked attempt yet at allowing billionaires to live on without the rest of us.
What infuriates me the most, for some reason, is how nobody seems to care that the robots leave the fridge door open for so long. I guess it's some form of solace that, even with the resources and tech to live on without us the billionaires still don't understand ecosystems or ecology. Waste energy training a machine to do the same thing a human can do but slower and more wastefully, just so you can order the machine around without worrying about it's feelings... I call this some form of solace as it means, even if they do away with us plebs, climate change will get'em as well - and whatever remaining life on Earth will be able to take a breather for the first time in centuries.
Interesting slides: Peter Gutmann - Why Quantum Cryptanalysis is Bollocks
Since quantum computers are far outside my expertise, I didn't realize how far-fetched it currently is to factor large numbers with quantum computers. I already knew it's not near-future stuff for practical attacks on e.g. real-world RSA keys, but I didn't know it's still that theoretical. (Although of course I lack the knowledge to assess whether that presentation is correct in its claims.)
But also, while reading it, I kept thinking how many of the broader points it makes also apply to the AI hype... (for example, the unfounded belief that game-changing breakthroughs will happen soon).
It's been frustrating to watch Gutmann slowly slide. He hasn't slid that far yet, I suppose. Don't discount his voice, but don't let him be the only resource for you to learn about quantum computing; fundamentally, post-quantum concerns are a sort of hard read in one direction, and Gutmann has decided to try a hard read in the opposite direction.
Page 19, complaining about lattice-based algorithms, is hypocritical; lattice-based approaches are roughly as well-studied as classical cryptography (Feistel networks, RSA) and elliptic curves. Yes, we haven't proven that lattice-based algorithms have the properties that we want, but we haven't proven them for classical circuits or over elliptic curves, either, and we nonetheless use those today for TLS and SSH.
Pages 28 and 29 are outright science denial and anti-intellectualism. By quoting Woit and Hossenfelder — who are sneerable in their own right for writing multiple anti-science books each — he is choosing anti-maths allies, which is not going to work for a subfield of maths like computer science or cryptography. In particular, p28 lies to the reader with a doubly-bogus analogy, claiming that both string theory and quantum computing are non-falsifiable and draw money away from other research. This sort of closing argument makes me doubt the entire premise.
In other news, Brian Merchant's going full-time on Blood in the Machine.
Did notice a passage in the annoucement which caught my eye:
Meanwhile, the Valley has doubled down on a grow-at-all-costs approach to AI, sinking hundreds of billions into a technology that will automate millions of jobs if it works, might kneecap the economy if it doesn’t, and will coat the internet in slop and misinformation either way.
I'm not sure if its just me, but it strikes me as telling about how AI's changed the cultural zeitgeist that Merchant's happily presenting automation as a bad thing without getting backlash (at least in this context).
will automate millions of jobs if it works, might kneecap the economy
will kneecap the economy if it works, too. Because companies certainly aren't going to keep people employed in those millions of jobs.