fantastic article, one small point to support your anger - instagram launched in 2009. if still managed to gain one million users in three months. this is only two years after the launch of the first iphone. it is incredible how picky choosy the AI cucks will be to justify their stupid product. like every data point is skewed intentionally by some of the smartest people. what a shame. thank you for this article.
Thank you for this, I was really disappointed with Bregman's article - it seemed as though he'd drunk the cool aid. I think that it's wedded to his increasing focus on productivity as a measure of success, as opposed to building meaning. He seemed to dismiss the huge environmental concerns over the whole AI infrastructure development too. Together, they suggest a world view rooted in the assumptions of capitalism as a 'natural' order, which serves to disempower both the real communities and the 'communities' of users who are already resisting AI.
Thank you for this measured response to a very disappointing article by Bregman. As you mention, I do get the sense that he is targeting the stereotypical chronically online leftists as a way of distinguishing himself as a realist and not 'one of the crazy ones', which is fine, but also doesn't really add anything to the debate on LLMs.
You can put me on the right - solid unreconstructed Thatcherite. You can, if you want, label me a Climate Denier - you'd be wrong, but I'm not a climate doomer like Bregman, so he would probably class me as one.
I am extremely skeptical of LLM AI, even though I use it frequently. In fact I'm extremely skeptical because I use it frequently. It has many valid uses, no doubt. It has some (but fewer) cost effective uses at prices where the price covers the actual cost of the AI doing its thing. It's still a huge financial bubble that is going to go splat and fundamental problems like hallucinations and treating guardrails as a suggestion are inherent to the technology and cannot be worked around using it.
BTW regarding the use of AI, the metaphor I saw a couple weeks back that gave two AI usage options - AI like a bicycle and AI like a train - works incredibly well in many ways
The ‘left’ do seem to be easier to scare and control with fears of AI, nuclear power, so-called infectious disease and Russian invasion but the ‘right’ have allowed themselves to be so flattered that they’re not so easy that they’re completely brain dead on climate change. If you're not a doomer, ie a realist, you're a denier.
US interests in oil, animal ag, pharma, AI, tech, media, entertainment, porn, finance and arms target left and right in different ways but control them both.
The difference between climate change and AI is obvious: the former is now supported by massive amounts of data, collected over decades, studied internationally; in the latter case, what we have are predictions about outcomes that are by no means certain. Further, with AI, the predictions are infected by the SV/Wall Street need for insane valuations to be true. That need is distinct from what clear-eyed adapters need. And those valuations depend on massive disruptions of the work force. Yet those disruptions are not going according to plan. From the outside, it has been clear for a LONG TIME that the AI overlords and financiers don't understand, or hope to wish away, the sociology of work: the language-based human interactions that govern so much of business, let alone government and academe. Some of this involves expertise and judgment; some of this is simply the squishy way business works. No doubt some in industry also want to drastically reduce the workforce, but they may run up against costly errors and bugs. And that's before you address the problem of AI unreliability and bias. This is characteristic of a bubble, a boom, a rush. AI ain't tulips, it's a fantastic technology, but it's unlikely to unfold the way the zillionaires want it to. None of that is "partisan."
I started reading but got lost in all the machinations.
Broadly; I think the whole point is to get us distracted by AI and arguing about who supports it and why etc etc etc because this deflects from the elephant in the room- that was actually mentioned at the top.
Climate change. It's here it's now it's massive. AI uses less water than animal ag, it can run on renewables and it can help integrate them into the grid. And we need all the help we can get.
Argue on about the ins and out of AI all you like. It's irrelevant. Adapting to and addressing climate change (and avoiding proxy war with Russia or China) are the only things we should be discussing right now; but you do you.
If I were a member of the global elite then impoverishing the middle class would be a much higher priority for me than good financial ROI. Gen AI has the potential to be the instrument of deliverance for very rich people who are unsatisfied with the current social contract.
Excellent. Thank you for writing this, it's much better than the article I was drafting. I'm so disappointed in Bergman and wouod love to see him evolve past this mistake.
el oh mf’n lol at “w-w-well i had a sick rebuttal to Kelsey Piper b-b-but it was too spicy!”
Kelsey absolutely aced you both, and Rutger said as much: Zitron has been laughably, verifiably wrong in his capabilities/utility/demand predictions, and only gets attention by being the easiest+most marketable (read: shrill) “AI Contrarian Voice” on the telly.
yall moved the goalposts from “the so called capabilities of the stochastic parrot plagiarism bot are nonsense, there’s no there there plus the economics are nonsense” became “oh well actually the issue with the economics is that when power users are forced to pay full cost they’ll feel rugpulled and stop paying cuz there’s no ROI”
why are power users gonna feel angry and rugpilled, genius? maybe because…they feel like they’re getting value???
also lol at “no i dont have skin in the game because unlike the hollow finance jackals i’m a pure freethinker doing it strictly on the merits”
read: i know i’d get rekt if i had to put my money where my screeds are for any appreciable period of time
anyways good luck on Finding The Fraud, i’m sure now that you have those OAI financials the whole house of cards will come tumbling down!
Jesus Christ said that we will always have the poor with us. So far, this seems to bear out. The so-called solutions for income inequality are either tyrannical or blissfully ignorant of human differences.
fantastic article, one small point to support your anger - instagram launched in 2009. if still managed to gain one million users in three months. this is only two years after the launch of the first iphone. it is incredible how picky choosy the AI cucks will be to justify their stupid product. like every data point is skewed intentionally by some of the smartest people. what a shame. thank you for this article.
That’s actually a really good point!
Thank you for this, I was really disappointed with Bregman's article - it seemed as though he'd drunk the cool aid. I think that it's wedded to his increasing focus on productivity as a measure of success, as opposed to building meaning. He seemed to dismiss the huge environmental concerns over the whole AI infrastructure development too. Together, they suggest a world view rooted in the assumptions of capitalism as a 'natural' order, which serves to disempower both the real communities and the 'communities' of users who are already resisting AI.
"Look! A.I can do things we can already do! It can even make a whole website now! Amazing!"
Noam Chomsky is epsteins close friend? So fk anything he has to say
Thank you for this measured response to a very disappointing article by Bregman. As you mention, I do get the sense that he is targeting the stereotypical chronically online leftists as a way of distinguishing himself as a realist and not 'one of the crazy ones', which is fine, but also doesn't really add anything to the debate on LLMs.
You can put me on the right - solid unreconstructed Thatcherite. You can, if you want, label me a Climate Denier - you'd be wrong, but I'm not a climate doomer like Bregman, so he would probably class me as one.
I am extremely skeptical of LLM AI, even though I use it frequently. In fact I'm extremely skeptical because I use it frequently. It has many valid uses, no doubt. It has some (but fewer) cost effective uses at prices where the price covers the actual cost of the AI doing its thing. It's still a huge financial bubble that is going to go splat and fundamental problems like hallucinations and treating guardrails as a suggestion are inherent to the technology and cannot be worked around using it.
BTW regarding the use of AI, the metaphor I saw a couple weeks back that gave two AI usage options - AI like a bicycle and AI like a train - works incredibly well in many ways
https://ombreolivier.substack.com/p/ai-bicycle-or-train?r=7yrqz
The ‘left’ do seem to be easier to scare and control with fears of AI, nuclear power, so-called infectious disease and Russian invasion but the ‘right’ have allowed themselves to be so flattered that they’re not so easy that they’re completely brain dead on climate change. If you're not a doomer, ie a realist, you're a denier.
US interests in oil, animal ag, pharma, AI, tech, media, entertainment, porn, finance and arms target left and right in different ways but control them both.
The difference between climate change and AI is obvious: the former is now supported by massive amounts of data, collected over decades, studied internationally; in the latter case, what we have are predictions about outcomes that are by no means certain. Further, with AI, the predictions are infected by the SV/Wall Street need for insane valuations to be true. That need is distinct from what clear-eyed adapters need. And those valuations depend on massive disruptions of the work force. Yet those disruptions are not going according to plan. From the outside, it has been clear for a LONG TIME that the AI overlords and financiers don't understand, or hope to wish away, the sociology of work: the language-based human interactions that govern so much of business, let alone government and academe. Some of this involves expertise and judgment; some of this is simply the squishy way business works. No doubt some in industry also want to drastically reduce the workforce, but they may run up against costly errors and bugs. And that's before you address the problem of AI unreliability and bias. This is characteristic of a bubble, a boom, a rush. AI ain't tulips, it's a fantastic technology, but it's unlikely to unfold the way the zillionaires want it to. None of that is "partisan."
I started reading but got lost in all the machinations.
Broadly; I think the whole point is to get us distracted by AI and arguing about who supports it and why etc etc etc because this deflects from the elephant in the room- that was actually mentioned at the top.
Climate change. It's here it's now it's massive. AI uses less water than animal ag, it can run on renewables and it can help integrate them into the grid. And we need all the help we can get.
Argue on about the ins and out of AI all you like. It's irrelevant. Adapting to and addressing climate change (and avoiding proxy war with Russia or China) are the only things we should be discussing right now; but you do you.
If I were a member of the global elite then impoverishing the middle class would be a much higher priority for me than good financial ROI. Gen AI has the potential to be the instrument of deliverance for very rich people who are unsatisfied with the current social contract.
Excellent. Thank you for writing this, it's much better than the article I was drafting. I'm so disappointed in Bergman and wouod love to see him evolve past this mistake.
A lot of swearing and sweating and gesticulating in this article. Still, the 21st century will continue to unfold despite the author’s disapproval.
Bregman: a disappointing follow… soon rescinded
Bregman: a disappointing follow… soon rescinded
Bregman: a disappointing follow… soon rescinded
el oh mf’n lol at “w-w-well i had a sick rebuttal to Kelsey Piper b-b-but it was too spicy!”
Kelsey absolutely aced you both, and Rutger said as much: Zitron has been laughably, verifiably wrong in his capabilities/utility/demand predictions, and only gets attention by being the easiest+most marketable (read: shrill) “AI Contrarian Voice” on the telly.
yall moved the goalposts from “the so called capabilities of the stochastic parrot plagiarism bot are nonsense, there’s no there there plus the economics are nonsense” became “oh well actually the issue with the economics is that when power users are forced to pay full cost they’ll feel rugpulled and stop paying cuz there’s no ROI”
why are power users gonna feel angry and rugpilled, genius? maybe because…they feel like they’re getting value???
also lol at “no i dont have skin in the game because unlike the hollow finance jackals i’m a pure freethinker doing it strictly on the merits”
read: i know i’d get rekt if i had to put my money where my screeds are for any appreciable period of time
anyways good luck on Finding The Fraud, i’m sure now that you have those OAI financials the whole house of cards will come tumbling down!
Ironically, this entire comment is the one thing in the world that could be improved by an LLM.
……..sick burn
Jesus Christ said that we will always have the poor with us. So far, this seems to bear out. The so-called solutions for income inequality are either tyrannical or blissfully ignorant of human differences.