I wish to live in a world where the media doesn’t consist of articles about how some rich or famous person says or thinks something.
There may be others reasons to interview Bill Gates about AI than the fact that he’s rich and famous.
Fuck it. Gun it at the brick wall. Jerry’s rigging up an emergency break as we speak. Don’t mind that the last piece to said break may be missing.
- Man who will probably die before we hit the wall
Bill Gates shouldn’t worry about people wanting to make a tent from his skin.
Well as long as Bill says it’s cool, I guess I don’t have to form my own opinion
We should at least hear what Ja Rule has to say
I’d prefer to hear 50’s opinion over Ja Rule
That should be enough to worry anybody.
From the guy who said 640Kb is enough for anyone…
So if we light the planet on fire to fuel the AI, the AI will then tell us how to put the fire out.
Okay sure, but how about we just… don’t do any of that?
The AI solution will be to stop producing food. That would save enormous amounts of energy.
No more food, but here’s half a pound of cricket flour. Meets all your daily nutritional needs!
Oh, gotcha. So crypto mining is bad, because he can’t make money off of it. But AI is just fine, because he can make tons of money off of it. I understand now. Makes perfect sense.
640MW should be enough for anyone.
Wait, is that a random number, or the actual scale of the power draw we’re talking about?
'Cause that’s fuck-all when we’re talking about industrial level power draw.
I originally had MW but changed it to be more in line with the supposed original quote.
I have to admit, this one took me a minute 🙂
Breaking: Rich tech guy thinks that the energy draw from rich tech projects is nothing to worry about.
Ah, okay, thanks Bill 👍
Said a guy banging a Russian ballet dancer while married.
Should we really listen to a guy like that?
Depends on how the person he’s married to feels about it. I don’t know how they define their relationship.
She divorced him
I mean his life, who cares.
He was on flights to Epstein’s Island. Everyone should care
Bill Gates says the massive power draw required for AI processing is nothing to worry about as AI will ultimately identify ways to help cut power consumption and drive the transition to sustainable energy.
The final solution the AI comes up with: Cut the power of the poor, euthanize the old and weak.
how about euthanize the entire planet? Just put us out of our fucking misery already goddamn
Dead wrong. AI is not as reliable as their makers would like to believe. AI is more likely to adopt all the flaws of humanity than make anything “better.” A subjective term.
It’s a text generator. All these people, were they to live in Antiquity, would jump ship to ship trying to visit every oracle and prophet in the Mediterranean asking questions about universe and seeking deep meaning in short texts of the Chinese fortune cookie kind.
And make paperclips.
If it were actually AI I might have some faith.
This isn’t a neural net processor, not a learning computer. It’s a fucking mechanical Turk. A bad one.
What he’s talking about isn’t capable of deriving new ideas. It’s just going to spit out shit it’s seen already.
The library of Babel is just as likely to give us the answers he’s talking about. More likely maybe because it’s at least already written down.
I wonder if all this is to burn enough energy to make ignorant people believe that we have AI. And then use that AI as a justification of the existing order of things, the same way “civil contract” is. That it’s not really technical, but rather a very big and expensive propaganda campaign for abolishing democracies.
I hate that they decided to have Morpheus hold up a battery instead of a processor because some empty suit thought audiences were too stupid to get it.
The whole thing never made much sense anyways, machines would be without scrupules and cut off any redundancies like extra limbs, they’d probably just keep your brain in a jar.
Wow, that is so dumb. I saw some crack pot dude trying to solve unsolved physics problems by using prompts like “imagine you are Einstein, then how would you solve: …”. Good to see he is not alone, but has Bill fucking Gates with similarly dumb AI takes.
This is even more dumb when even Joan f-g Rowling in her books about magic for children described how and why magic can’t do this. One of the reasons I like Harry Potter - not for the plot or the human part, but for the magic there being quite similar to computers in our time. With similar limitations, except for unique cases.
So no matter how much one hates Rowling (I don’t, she’s done more good than evil by far still), she’s smarter and more decent than most of the humanity. That sucks.
So no matter how much one hates Rowling (I don’t, she’s done more good than evil by far still), she’s smarter and more decent than most of the humanity. That sucks.
Lol. She lucked into an amazing world that managed to remain a good story despite her writing, not because of it. She’s not an idiot, but literally every other piece of writing she’s ever put out kinda slams the “smarter than most of humanity” line.
She’s not an idiot, but literally every other piece of writing she’s ever put out kinda slams the “smarter than most of humanity” line.
EDIT: accidental keypress
This happens and doesn’t mean that she
lucked into an amazing world that managed to remain a good story despite her writing, not because of it
, everyone who has, you know, actually created something knows that from experience.
They weren’t meant to be causative, and I stand by both of my statements. Her writing is objectively bad, and it’s a small miracle that she didn’t manage to ruin this series like everything else she’s written. Yes, I know those are strong words, and yes, I do believe them.
Rich billionaire twat who owns a shitload of Microsoft shares says AI is good, don’t let the bubble burst. More at ten.
Don’t forget about him spending time on Epstein’s island with a bunch of underage girls.
Or how the Gates foundation fought for the Oxford COVID vaccine NOT to be open sourced, and instead sold for profit, so that it wouldn’t undermine his pharma stocks.
Ah yes, classic tech solutionism.
“No need to be frugal, the tech will evolve and fix the causes of climate change!”
We need a solution right now, not in a decade, dumb ass. So frugality is the answer.
To quote the post more specifically:
Even as our species destroys its only home, we assume that the solutions to climate change must lie in technology, without stopping to examine the role that this very attitude has played in the crisis.
This is so deeply ingrained in our social consciousness that, when there is a new impressive technology, we assume that it must be here to solve one of our big problems. As the AI hype quickens the pace of our ecological devastation, we’re so dazzled by the technology that there is actual debate in supposedly serious publications as to whether AI is going to save us from climate change, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary.
Suddenly I’m worried about AI’s energy draw. “6 percent of global electricity” is not a small amount of electricity.
