I have a question, because many people are just faking morals and serving still the corrupt. Since long I made AI design, I am working to publish it, I also put it my master thesis as a safe copyright, bound to science. I have this design since long for a smart AI, way pior to the AI boom, when I tried to find business partners the AI boom happened. I suspect its theft. A counter measure is an open source community. My university threatens to sue me, if I publish my critic towards the theme of the subject I made my degree, and the entire thesis is a take down of that science with critic, while I was kicked out prior from my masters and got in by press pressure. I was told any public statement will be used to sue me, if it damages their reputation or of that science. The truth cannot be sued though, it is documented in written form. How would you suggest to contribute to the open source community. I also need financial stability to take care of my family, though. Maybe you can do a video on it. TH-cam showed me this video. This is not a lie, in doubt it is a question of open source community and how to contribute or connect to it and maybe a video to it.
To those who think I don’t know the difference between trickle down economics and UBI, what I’m saying is that Sam preaches UBI and does things aligned with trickle down economics. Not that they are the same. They are in fact the opposite. Now this part is just my opinion but I personally have a general distrust of governments (just like tech companies) saying they will do these things unless their is monetary incentive for them to do so. It’ll be great if it happens but I’m not holding my breath on it and securing myself regardless.
@@TinaHuang1 I agree with you. A few differences maybe... the openAI maybe started with good an genuine inclinations,, but they got "corrupted" by the fame, money, power... a bit of the good life. I don't know. But your point Is very strong.
9:41 One very important note: "Trickle down economics" is a BS, strawman, theory that no economist has ever created or defended and is use only by political actors (politicians, bureaucrats, think tanks and activist), manly by the left and some people on the right who are economically illiterate. Basically, the trickle down "theory" is as much of an ECONOMIC THEORY as the Amazon Go "AI" is an ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE! Other than this one, great video.
@@TinaHuang1UBI is a total lie. It just drives up inflation, benefitting the wealthy. UBI does nothing to increase the quantity or quality of goods and services available to the public. UBS (Universal Basic Services) is the opposite UBI. UBS is the future.
People pushed the name AI. You didn’t hear OpenAI touting GPT2 or 3 as “real AI”. Sam Altman said anyone could have built chat GPT and no one would. Anyone working in “AI” knows LLMs are good tools but not AGI or whatever you want to call it.
I have almost zero doubts that we will end up in a cyberpunk, low-life and high-tech future, rather than a solarpunk one. Every millimeter of breathing room we gain from tech advancements which could benefit the workers, will be used to disproportionally benefit the people at the top and further the class divide.
@@nhinged they mean as in the concept of cyberpunk coined way before the games and before Mike Pondsmith wrote his first RPG. They are not talking about style neither.
Anything the ruling class promotes benefits the ruling class. Whether or not it benefits anyone else has no relation to whether or not they'll promote it. Most AI I've used has very clear establishment-aligned bias.
@@Geekgaucho you have no idea what badfeng means. "ruling class" means billionaires, top ceo's at certain mega corporations, eg pfizer, and the big banks, european royalty, international group founders like WEF's Klaus Schwab, WHO's Ghebreyesus, etc, and people that are regulars at things like bilderberg, and davos. Elected politicians can generally be excluded - they are the pawns used by the ruling class, but sometimes there's crossover. The middle class and poor are the ones ruled, schmucks like you and me, and the homeless and kids who don't own shoes in africa, etc.
@@Geekgaucho Yeah to my cat. Your point didn't even invalidate their point. When looking up hurts your neck so hard, you might wanna train your neck a little more 😘(sorry but a bit sassiness is required sometimes) In Capitalism, capital accumulates with capital and capital rules. Look at wikipedia article "Distribution of wealth" and than think again. While you are not entirely wrong, 88% percent of people hold 15% of power (as of 2021). So please put your world view in perspective. Nevertheless have a nice time stranger. 🤗
Establishment-aligned bias is 100% correct, sadly. First questions I asked showed that it toes the line in every way. It's mainstream everything and overly PC to so it can't be favouring the truth as a priority. Most people have lost the ability for rational logical thinking so they don't even notice. I saw an example of an AI even saying thermonuclear war would would be better than misgendering Katlin Jenner. For the record Katlin Jenner said she'd rather be misgendered than the other option.
With AI "open-source" is a misleading term as there is almost no source. "Open Weights" is a term that has emerged to describe models where the weights and biases are released, but not the training data and sadly this describes the majority of "open-source" models. I'd argue models without training data are closed-source "free-beer" as their training data remains closed, and in the AI paradigm the data IS the source. There are a few truly open-source models out there that released their training data along with their weights and biases, but let's not get hoodwinked by people who characterize "free models" as "open-source". They are not. To be "open-source" they need release the training data and processes required to rebuild them from scratch.
We all imagined Ai would be used to solve complex issues; Fusion, global warming, cancer, world hunger, etc... But now that it's here, all the corporations are clamming to jam out agents as replacements of human labor in every single job imaginable. I have a hard time imagining this will end well.
But there's still many cases where AI doesn't fully replace human labor, so it's not even capable of doing that effectively. What's really going to be the death knell is the realization that AI is being jammed into pre-existing products without providing much benefit- "AI-powered search" is one of the more egregious examples
@@MegaMEGATRUCK Yes, there will be an AI bubble that will burst indeed. The issue behind of all the main societal problems we are facing as a species these days remains the same. Its this world wide scale scam of how the investment markets work and evolved since the second half of the 20th Century.
For instance in McDonalds there is a touch screen to select your order. So it's not even needed AI to replace labour, you can just use a simple program and a screen to replace cashiers.
I didn't. And I don't believe AI will replace most jobs. It will just make jobs easier and give companies an excuse for mass layoffs. But that doesn't mean they can let the machine alone. AI costs a lot of electricity so while it might give us smart grids, everything else AI will increase energy demands more than smart grids can possibly optimize. And generally the quality of many things will degrade as big tech is demonstrating to us right now. The real danger I see is how much trust people and govts will put into AI and us failing to recognize deepfakes in the long term. You have to keep in mind that it's company that decide about hiring and firing people and govts that write the rules for that
So Sam Altman is just a business man that happened to invest in OpenAI, and when that little fish turned out to be a pot of gold then he started to pose as great AI visionary? Hilarious turn of events 😂
@@andrewhooper7603 The long term aspect matters far less. Yes, it is a pot of gold simply because it's hype driven right now and investors threw money at him, just as much as they threw at Nvidia. That stock simply expanded in one year. If the whole AI thing busts within one year, he will still be far richer than 2 years ago.
@@andrewhooper7603 The hope behind the business plan is scaling laws matter which will act as a moat of sorts. They've made $2 billion in revenue after spending a few hundred million. So from their perspective everything makes sense still. A) Their proclaimed hope is scaling laws continue to at least agi, but hoping for asi and use it like a cheat code of value creation. B) More realistic their business is multimodal ai that can automate tasks against a handful of other large rivals who can also afford the large upfront costs. ~Speed of inference & reasoning is needed for real time agents however bc of their statelessness they would still require thorough prompt crafting, rag, and scaffolding ~ modalities (vision) for apps and "seeing" the screen, ~media manipulation/creation (video, image) ~Larger context windows for being able to "see" larger texts, documents, codebases The short of it is larger models can better learn from their training. Is there a long-term profitable business? Well let's assume that B) is more realistic, then it depends on whether they can out compete or survive alongside the larger players. Even if google is behind or faking it, they could just offer cheaper services to pry customers off and as for MS who knows what the future holds. If they were alone, I'd say yes their business of gate keeping Large ai model services is profitable. Honest answer is I do not know what the future holds other than expect ai, but they are profitable atm. Likely future within 10 years: -at least be able to manipulate images & videos quite easily esp in a piece wise manner like boxinator & krea & adobe functionality -Real Time agents able to control the screen however possibly silly or forgetful or meh-quality if no breakthrough is made in statefulness. -Agents embodied in Robots will be real, but may be limited to 'tasks' due to the statelessness issue. Tasks may be learned via a download or via tele-operation or watching the human given a low amount of examples.
@@andrewhooper7603The hope behind the business plan is scaling laws matter which will act as a moat of sorts. They've made $2 billion in revenue after spending a few hundred million. So from their perspective everything makes sense still. A) Their proclaimed hope is scaling laws continue to at least agi, but hoping for asi and use it like a cheat code of value creation. B) More realistic their business is multimodal ai that can automate tasks against a handful of other large rivals who can also afford the large upfront costs. ~Speed of inference & reasoning is needed for real time agents however bc of their statelessness they would still require thorough prompt crafting, rag, and scaffolding ~ modalities (vision) for apps and "seeing" the screen, ~media manipulation/creation (video, image) ~Larger context windows for being able to "see" larger texts, documents, codebases The short of it is larger models can better learn from their training. Is there a long-term profitable business? Well let's assume that B) is more realistic, then it depends on whether they can out compete or survive alongside the larger players. Even if google is behind or faking it, they could just offer cheaper services to pry customers off and as for MS who knows what the future holds. If they were alone, I'd say yes their business of gate keeping Large ai model services is profitable. But it could become a race to the bottom. Honest answer is I do not know what the future holds other than expect ai, but they are profitable atm. Likely future within 10 years: -at least be able to manipulate images & videos quite easily esp in a piece wise manner like boxinator & krea & adobe functionality -Real Time agents able to control the screen however possibly silly or forgetful or meh-quality if no breakthrough is made in statefulness. -Agents embodied in Robots will be real, but may be limited to 'tasks' due to the statelessness issue. Tasks may be learned via a download or via tele-operation or watching the human given a low amount of examples.
@@andrewhooper7603 The hope behind the business plan is scaling laws matter which will act as a moat of sorts. They've made $2 billion in revenue after spending a few hundred million. So from their perspective everything makes sense still. A) Their proclaimed hope is scaling laws continue to at least agi, but hoping for asi and use it like a cheat code of value creation. B) More realistic their business is multimodal ai that can automate tasks against a handful of other large rivals who can also afford the large upfront costs. ~Speed of inference & reasoning is needed for real time agents however bc of their statelessness they would still require thorough prompt crafting, rag, and scaffolding ~ modalities (vision) for apps and "seeing" the screen, ~media manipulation/creation (video, image) ~Larger context windows for being able to "see" larger texts, documents, codebases The short of it is larger models can better learn from their training. Is there a long-term profitable business? Well let's assume that B) is more realistic, then it depends on whether they can out compete or survive alongside the larger players. Even if google is behind or faking it, they could just offer cheaper services to pry customers off and as for MS who knows what the future holds. If they were alone, I'd say yes their business of gate keeping Large ai model services is profitable. But it could become a race to the bottom. Honest answer is I do not know what the future holds other than expect ai, but they are profitable atm. Likely future within 10 years: -at least be able to manipulate images & videos quite easily esp in a piece wise manner like boxinator & krea & adobe functionality -Real Time agents able to control the screen however possibly silly or forgetful or meh-quality if no breakthrough is made in statefulness. -Agents embodied in Robots will be real, but may be limited to 'tasks' due to the statelessness issue. Tasks may be learned via a download or via tele-operation or watching the human given a low amount of examples.
Look at all of the technology and productivity gained since 1938 40hrs work week in the Labor Standards Act, has any of the productivity gained resulted in 1 less hour of work? or given anyone earlier retirement or more vacations? So every time you hear "more productivity" ask for who?
the people coding themselves out of jobs i.e. building these AI, don't work onky 40 hrs a week. 40 hrs a week is a joke and has been since the advent the "salaried" employee.
Very fair point. We live in a system that puts other down in order to lift a few up. Many rules of this system are finely tuned to make sure this happens without making it obvious who is to blame for it. And no one is really talking about the vices that do most of the work that everyone just accepts as a natural part of human life. Example: property tax and mortgages. Utter dependance on corporations. And all kinds of fun little local laws that somehow got homoginized throughout the U.S. in under a few decades. No one is questioning who these things really benefit or even putting critical thought in how they came to be. At least not that I have seen yet. Ai is just going to go right in the center of the toolbox of the shadowy force that brought all these other things about which we now don't even notice because they sit in plain sight.
@@John5iveyeah it’s going to be very funny when these dudes realize the rich don’t want to take care of people they don’t need to do labor. Once AI gets good enough they are just going to let a lot of people die
Most humans aren't ready for having limitless free time. Chaos would ensue. We evolved through millions of years of struggle. Our brains can't handle not having to struggle. We'd have to replace useful work that will be done by AI in future with some kind of other competitive endeavours like enforced participation in competitive sports in order to earn our UBI cheque.
Long time ago power was in the hand of the king. The biggest lie is that the power is in the hands of the people. Power is in the hands of a few and they don’t want you to have it. In other words “nothing is free”.
Well the few are just more organized because well they are few, but the real power is always in the hands of the people, who get organized when the need calls for it. When the ambition and foolishness of those in power fill the quota that takes for the whole to organize, that is the time their rule ends.
I still strongly believe truth is stranger than fiction and that one day we'll find out the reason why the few were so organized and how they kept power in their families for centuries. And that will be quite the disgusting revelation.
@@Xfacter We already know that and it is disgusting, having to do with murder, indoctrination, misinformation, incest, single inheritor, etc. I think you would like the work by the late great Jordan Maxwell.
Most kings in history had responsibilities towards their people. If they didn't protect them, they would be replaced, conspired against, assassinated or just pushed out of power. Nowadays, big companies have no responsibilities, they only care about profits, not one bit about employees (unless it serves them into making more money). And they absolutely don't care about city infrastructures and social advancement. That's why pure capititalism is very dangerous.
When Billionaire Rich folk says I am donating 90% of my wealth to philanthropy, they mean they will give it to their own charitable foundation they started with their children in control, where only a trickle of income of the foundation goes to donation and rest is kept and used by their own families.
Joe That is absolutely true. That is what most of them are doing. Bill Gates is funneling his "donations" to his own charity corporation (pro profit), gets full tax exemption and then funnels it all back to himself.
And one more thing when you go to fast food chains and any big business where they collect donations for kids, women and other social issues to show they are supporting these cause and look good in front of public so they make more money but they don't giveaway any money from their corporation to the above causes😂😂😂
@@nobodythenobody9779 Bingo. All these supposedly altruistic moguls always seem to do pretty well despite spouting Universal Basic Income as the solution to all society's problems. Moreover, "Trickle Down Economics" does work, and works extremely well. It's just that the people (i.e. Westerners) expecting to get the table scraps are often surprised to discover that they're already really the world's 1% and there's a LOT of hungry mouths lower on the social pyramid.
@@nobodythenobody9779government regulation is completely necessary to protect society from the unscrupulous and greedy who simply want to exploit society and the advancement of tech for monetary gain at any expense to the populations health and the environment it lives in. Just look at what has happened with oil and gas, and the tendrils it has in every function in society, and the damage it is doing, and will do within the lifetime of a human born today, damage it knew would happen, and covered up, denied and obfuscated for as long as possible before switching to a 'oh its too late too stop, we can only transition (to the inconveniently less profitable) renewables at a glacial pace, have to rely on sham or dangerous tech fantasies like carbon capture or cloud seeding, and fake tree planting carbon credit schemes whitewashing companies everwhere, its the only serious sensible option, sorry about that' Capitalism has the same problem as communism, it becomes too corrupt. The big difference is the current version of capitalism will ultimately collapse not just human civilisation but the conditions in the environment humans need to even survive. Capitalism simply had a slower burn and more success before it inflicts a worse impact than the anything communism ever caused. Global devastation, mass migration,war, millions dead from famine and disease. This is the guaranteed by physics result of staying the current course. Yet you think the solution is not only more of the same but worse?? Thats what lower regulation would bring. Worse and sooner. You are being so misled by bad actors who only have the interests of the megarich in mind and its crazy how common it is to see this view because its actually crazy.
@@nobodythenobody9779 Capitalism is the problem ... if capitalism doesn't mean you can use your possessions in the most efficient way possible (see minimalism) The goverment stopping inflation by taking money out of the system and redirecting that money to a select group of people who need it the most has been wildly unpopular. Dumb people like that should be forced to follow an economics course. Followed by a basic human decency retrainment camp.
To those who think I don’t know the difference between trickle down economics and UBI, what I’m saying is that Sam preaches UBI and does things aligned with trickle down economics. Not that they are the same. They are in fact the opposite. Now this part is just my opinion but I personally have a general distrust of governments (just like tech companies) saying they will do these things unless their is monetary incentive for them to do so. It’ll be great if it happens but I’m not holding my breath on it and securing myself regardless.
@ccordyceps dude what a goofy comment. If your angle against her argument is anti techbology fear mongering then it's incredibly weak lol. But what else do you have to work with 🤷♂️
@@siloporcen 'Your' is actually correct in this usage since it is a possessive, as in, 'your angle'. If the user had used the term 'you're' as you had suggested, it would have been 'you are angle'. In response to the original point; I wouldn't necessarily call it fear mongering, it's more like assessing a game board and potential problems. Ultimately the base point of the video with corporations/governments screwing people in the name of 'the good of humanity' is fair. It's a shame when the tech or the ideals are good, but the people are not. C'est la vie.
The "general distrust of governments" has been culturally driven by the 1% over the last 40 years, while at the same time that 1% has essentially taken over governance for their own ends. It's the perfect scam. Convince the masses that government is bad, while at the same time defund the government through massive tax breaks for the wealthy draining resources that could otherwise serve those same masses. Ask anyone in Sweden for instance if they would trade the government services they get, with the situation in the US. Sweden has what is referred to as the Nordic Economic System, and while it isn't perfect, it allows private enterprise to co-exist alongside a strong socialist framework that provides services such as a national healthcare system including dental, vision, etc at a fraction of the cost (paid for by taxes, but less spent per capita than what people in the US pay for premiums for high deductible policies), free university education to those whose grades qualify them for it, etc. There is historic inequality in the US, and it is because for the last four decades the 1% has been winning the class wars that they started. The chances that the 1% will back, or pay for a UBI in the US is exactly zero, so I essentially agree with your intuition on that.
Of course, that's why it's called *Artificial* Intelligence and not just Intelligence. It amazes me how many people are disappointed that these systems aren't actually sentient and just giving the illusion of intelligence. The A part does actually mean something.
1:30 “It all hit me the other day how AI’s use in Big Tech is unsettling…..anyways here’s an ad to learn how to use large language models in enterprise businesses/big tech”
If trickle down economy worked than why did the gap between rich and poor widen so much if we compare the top 1% (income gain 160.3%) compared to the bottom fifth of households (income gain 26%)? And if we take the top 0.1% the gap is even larger (income gain 345.2%). This data is from 1979 till 2019.
Feels great to hear someone not only say what needs to be said about big tech AI, but in front of a large audience. This may be your best video yet, at least in this vein of video.
She fell off and is trying to be controversial to get more views. I'm in an AI team for call centers and there's so much AI is doing especially with Whisper and GPT. She doesn't understand how much trash pre-AI software there is.
@@zurgesmiecal I will let/step aside for AI to do my job when the time comes. Big tech will say whatever to make the investors happy. That's literally how every business works. You think a company will spill the secrets of what it's doing internally? This is what doing data science all day does to a person. Brain rot.
Also: Sam was "huge" on making sure UBI became a thing. More recently he said that everyone should get a UCI or some crud that means Universal Compute Income (ergo, free time on on the AIs). I'm like, uh.. how is that gonna pay my rent and feed me?
Having spent the last 10 years doing AI & ML, the biggest problem is it doesn't actually work. Sure, you might get a single digit improvement, but it's hardly worth the time & $$$$. Yeah, people can come up with great, stunning examples. But they are just examples.....
How can you work on something that doesn't work for 10 years!? Seriously though, there are so many things that weren't possible at all that are now possible thanks to AI. It can't do everything but there are things it can do way better than anything that came before.
thank God, us woke people love when big tech and big corp take over things. we fight with the big man, not against him! that's the feminist way! yee-haa! im just another pseudo-intellectual here! go-go gadget!
Yes. But Ai is already being used by the US just look up Palantir. No doubt it used Ai to scan the posts we make and actions we take. Its essentially a "pre-crime" system and it is disgusting. Someone should do a video on it, im sure it would rake in the views 😄👍
So, regulate the AI companies? Or let the mad scientists cook? One or the other people, everyone complains and says we need to put a leash on these projects. So, we did. And of course, people then bitch and come up with conspiracies on how the leashes themselves are somehow bad. Do you want these companies to be overseen and regulated? Or do you want them to build fucking digital Gods in closets only for us to find out when it's too late?
the simple truth most aren't seeing, pretty sure the fear mongering and the art-related controversies are also manufactured by openai and them just to get the public to also ask for regulation
Many of those "open source" things you showed often run on closed source APIs. Only truly open source is things like PyTorch, open model, open weights, running your LLM locally etc.
They're mostly "open weights" at best, but the datasets and methodologies used to train these frontier models like Llama 3 are absolutely proprietary. A dissenting narrative on Meta's position to make available the model weights is their intent to capture market share in the short to medium term, but for dominance and control in the long term. Think: Google Chrome and Android's position in the market and their meteoric rise riding off the meme of open source with Chromium and AOSP respectively.
@@peter_phamous The "methodologies" are indeed also open source, often published in scientific papers, in fact the most "open source" of all the AI universe are the "methodologies". About the datasets are completely useless for anybody without huge compute power. For example llama-3 model was trained with 15 trillion tokens dataset. Do you have thousands of hard drives and tens of thousands of GPUs in your home to be able to use those datasets? Please don't make ridiculous arguments. The open weights instead are extremely useful to allow the open source community to improve those models by finetunning them with their own personal datasets.
THANK YOU! It's ridiculous how not many people are addressing the elephant in the room. I'd just add that the reason for their push for "safety" at this point can also be to hinder emerging companies from catching up.
'Regulation' is a as you say a tool for Big Biz to keep tiny Biz down. The administrative overhead for one man becomes so big, there is no time to work.
Not only do we need to support open source, but our economic system needs to change. Without changes to the economic system, as shown in the video with the trickle down illustrations, it doesn't matter what we do in the open source realm, if companies are allowed to sell us on a "Star Trek" future but actively work to deliver a "Hunger Games" or "Blade Runner" future, we are all doomed. This doom is not the product of AI technology, it is the product of greed and capitalism. Every technology that increases worker productivity can be thrown into the same bucket as AI, where the bosses use these technologies to increase profit, via increase in worker productivity, without delivering any benefit for the worker. In fact, quite the opposite. As worker productivity increases, less and less workers will eventually be needed, increasing unemployment and lowering the negotiation power of the worker, due to surplus in the workforce. This adds up to a downward spiral for the worker. The worker should not be in a position to hope that the bosses trickle down benefit. The workers should be the bosses. In other words, corporations should not be shareholder owned, they should be worker owned and the benefit to the workers, for increased worker productivity, should be decided, based upon, what is good for the worker and what is good for the business, in that order. This model still does not completely address the issue with companies eventually shedding workers, due to maximally increase worker productivity. Something needs to be done about the worker that find themselves out of a job, simply due to the advancement of technology. This problem should be solved through two avenues. 1. an ever decreasing number of hours required from workers, on a day/week/month basis, without a decrease in pay. This would allow employees to keep their jobs but benefit from lower working hours and slowing the shedding of workers due to increased productivity and increase in unemployment. 2. As mentioned in the video, an establishment of a UBI system that has a tie to certain economic metrics, that allows for the UBI to be a liveable amount, without the risk of lagging behind the overall economy or allowing politicians to use it as a bargaining chip.
Good points. I disagree with the idea that corporations should be worker controlled. Unions should be able to make sure workers take part in the increased productivity. Wealth accumulation needs to be limited, as in allows individuals or group of individuals, to rival state power i.e. a national security risk. Money needs to be kept out of politics, and lobbyists and donors needs to be shown the door.
@@iRelevant.47.system.boycott I agree about donors, but believe it or not, I actually think lobbyists need to be allowed. Even though we tend to think of lobbyists as people trying to influence legislators, on behalf of greedy corporations, they are also people trying to influence legislators on behalf of the likes of environmental groups, unions, victim advocacy groups, etc. etc. etc. The issue is what they use as influence. Gifts, money, job promises, campaign donations should all be banned, IMO, and information and the gaining or loss of votes should be the only currency allowed. As far as worker ownership of companies, I actually think a great deal of the corruption in politics could be alleviated by this system. When a company is run by the workers, not only does the company care about its own self interests, but it also cares about the workers, the worker's family, the place where workers, the worker's future and their family's future. I believe the would result in much longer term thinking, more concern for the world we live in and the effects the company has on its communities. Anyway, my 2 cents. Thanks for your reply.😀
Unions are helpful, but have you noticed how difficult it is to get a union approved and working? Companies fight tooth and nail against unions. We need to go beyond that - to worker controlled companies.
I don't support big tech and smh every time AI experts point to global poverty being on the decline, mention UBI or talk about ethics. The last thing i need is profit driven mega corporations and their LLMs dictating to me what is ethical to discuss.
@@kayakMike1000 guilty a charged. even though I use adblocker, i am ultimately feeding GOOG a great deal of data but I think it's a fair trade of to support good creators.
Not sure why nobody mentions this, but I think there's an important nuance to this conversation that is almost always overlooked these day: There is a HUGE difference between Generative AI (what we see currently flooding the market) and AGI (Artificial General Intelligence). My two sense is that these billionaires who were previously worried about human safety due to the evolution of AI were actually worried about the evolution of AGI. But AGI is such a pipe dream (at least considering the current state of tech) that they've shifted their focus to the more popular, and marketable, Generative AI which poses no threat to anyone besides those doing relatively straightforwards tasks. It's not a "This person is a liar and doesn't care if humanity dies" argument; It's more likely that the "AI" that everyone is _currently_ talking about is literally just a bunch of machine learning models propped up behind some smoke and mirrors and is NOWHERE NEAR capable of any sort of real, sentient intelligence (which is where the risk to humanity actually resides).
I agree completely with you on this. The current AI is not really AI as such, more machine learning, marketing hype, and relatively trivial. When someone develops an AGI, or singularity, then the last person to leave might as well switch off the lights.
yeah our current AI is nothing more than a toy. There is "consciousness" or "thinking" thread whatsoever. They are really quite simple when you delve into them. A rat's brain is a billion times more complex than any AI we have right now. These AI optimists seem to think that by magically pushing in more random data into these things will somehow give us AGI. But how? the things don't think at all. This is just another AI hype cycle just like in the 1950's when they could automatically translate 1 English wod into 1 Russian word, they then thought by putting in all the other words in the dictionary in 3 years they'd have AI that can magically autotranslate every language. Completely neglecting grammar, nuance and all that. What we'll get in the next 5 years is they'll spent billions on more training, squeeze out some slightly better results, maybe implement some of this stuff into some business software (enabling them to lay off more low level workers) but they'll ultimately hit a roof and have nowhere else to go until some new method is invented. I hope I'm wrong and they can come up with some "consciousness" thread that truly allows an AI to work on itself (and other things) intelligently but I've seen no evidence of that so far. Wake me up when they show me a robot that passes the "make a cup of coffee in a random person's house" test.
I think the facial expression and tone of these tech leaders speaking says it all. They are not smiling, they don't sound excited, there's no genuine joy.
You have a well developed intuition for what is in the interest of humanity as a whole and what is deceptive talk from people who are so poor that the only thing they've got... Is money.
I very much like it already. If need Feedback, I call the AI. Trying to code, get help with the AI. Do some language task, asking the AI. Sometimes I go on a walk and have a conversation about a topic of interest. When I am studying, I can ask questions to the AI. Yes the future might be a bit scary, but currently it is very valuable.
Still, it cannot be denied that with every technological improvement lives have gotten better over the centuries. AI is another that should do the same. Ideally, in time, perhaps something like a true utopia can be achieved.
It's not hype but people are faking it to get ahead and create hype to get investors. Happens with all new technology. It's about money. AI is going to be super useful. The bad thing is that the people with the most money will be able to do the most and have the most control. As long as people continue to share how they make things and have it open source though we can try and use these same tools
AI is good if you use it for the benefits of others because it can help our work faster. But if it use for the interest of the owner of these AI Companies then it is really scary.
One of the reasons the Luddites opposed the machines textile manufacturers were rolling out was that it was incredibly efficient at quickly producing piles of low quality cloth. I predict AI is going to, at best, leave us with reams of dogshit copy conjured up by utterly mediocre office potatoes.
AI is the modern iteration of the belief in the 'Computer' and before that the 'Robot' con. There is no intelligence, but the illusion of intelligence. It reflects the narrow limited understanding of humans and life. Unfortunately it will impact life, but with the current elite, not in a positive way. The 'Futuists' of the '30's imagined the wonders of technology would lead to a work load of 4 hrs pr. week ... that was before computers entered the scene ... look at where we are, in a time squeeze.
... Which job loss gives you a narrow time window (before poverty kills) in which to regroup, grow your AI skills, and come back to steal their job in turn. Don't we all love having cutthroat individualism as our prime societal ethic.
I implement AI, so yes that's how it works. AI in general is not a tool to 'take jobs', it's a tool to automate processes. A tool like any other I've been implementing for years to remove repetition. If your job involves largely repetition then yes, automation will catch up to you. Jobs that are 'somewhat repetitive' are the ones where people disbelieve and this comment applies. The 'hard parts' get moved to a person, the repetition is scripted(AI or whatever) and no longer forms part of the JD for the person. So, you need less people. Normally people are not fired etrenched. They are repurposed and over time people leave... they are not rehired.
I have had a very pessimistic view for about a year now. 1. UBI will be the minimum that avoids mass starvation and mass homelessness 2. When 40% of white collar workers have been retrenched UBI is the only possible outcome. 3. Regulation is a pipedream. UBI : just do the arithmetic. Take the US. You have to pay UBI to everyone to avoid administering it, which will be close to impossible. So 340M times (say) $2000 times 12 - ooooops. very big number. Absolutely cannot make that $10,000. I think the collapse most likely starts within the next 3 or 4 years. I can see no reason for this not to happen.
UBI is just Marxism / Communism rebranded 😒 and will stagnate any culture that pushes it as there will be no incentive to do better or innovate * see Cuba
Who will finance UBI in a society where no one works ? AI don't pay any taxes. Taxes from Corporation and the Rich ? So Corporations replace workers with AI, then pay those workers UBI to sit idle at home. The incentive for doing this is that if everyone is broke, there will be no one to buy the products of the Corporations. Seems like some kind of absurd zero sum game.
Open source community is crucial and doing its job in AI like it has done in previous eras of tech. Open source will democratize AI and prevent super centralization. It's powerful how Tina explains the difference between corporate and open source so there is a frame of revenue to understand why open source is so important.
Hmm I’m not anti AI though? I’m all for AI being used correctly. Also it’s happening whether we like it or not so better choice to learn and adapt. I just needed to point this out about big tech AI companies
While making money from a completely made-up topic can be tricky, there are definitely ways to leverage your creativity and come up with a niche topic that has earning potential. Here are some approaches: Combine existing interests: Do you have hobbies you're passionate about? Think about ways to merge them. For example, if you love video games and fitness, you could create a channel on "Gamified Fitness" with workouts inspired by popular games. Target emerging trends: Stay updated on current events and social media trends. Is there a new technology or social movement gaining traction? You could position yourself as an expert on a sub-topic within that trend. Solve specific problems: Are there small, everyday challenges people face? Brainstorm solutions and build content around them. For instance, "Tiny Apartment Organization Hacks" could be a great niche for a blog or TH-cam channel. Target a specific audience: Instead of creating generic content, focus on a particular demographic. This could be parents of toddlers, entrepreneurs over 50, or gamers who love indie games. Understanding their needs allows you to tailor your content and potentially offer solutions they'll pay for. Remember, the key is to find a niche that balances creativity, problem-solving, and audience interest. Don't be afraid to experiment and see what resonates!
You criticize AI, yet the video starts with a ad section that explicitly advertises how to leverage the suddenly super useful power of AI to positively impact your own career 😅
The limitations in language is causing trouble for AI learning... Like if you stop AI from saying certain politically incorrect things ... You also stop the AI from from going down that branch and learn something useful ...
A few months ago, I amused myself by tying Gemini into knots. Unfortunately, it did not learn from its mistakes. Which I would think is the whole point of AI. It was very nostalgic for me, reminding me of the fun days in the 1980s I spent tying Eliza into knots.
LLM context windows are getting much bigger, and different kinds of more persistent memory are being implemented. I don't get why people assume that the truly astonishing progress we've seen over the last few years would come to a staggering halt at whatever moment they make that claim.
the reality is OpenAI is literally built on open source technology. Without open source contributors and projects, GPT literally wouldn't exist. I'm bias and contribute to apache.
My litmus test for AI has been prompting it to make a unique and competitive Magic the Gathering deck for the Modern Format for me. To date, I've been really underwhelmed. For starters, the knowledge base in the chat tools I've used has been really old. They don't know about new MTG cards that have come out in like the past five years. I have yet to have a "wow!" moment. Magic the Gathering is one of the most complex games in the known world, so it stands to reason, that this is a decent way to test out the technology.
Have you tried fancier methods like RAG or fine-tuning to see if it can improve your results? The test is interesting but expecting an AI model to innovate, on a niche domain like MTG, from memory is not realistic.
This video is so on point! Btw, the first "chess automaton" was done in the 1700s and had a human chess player inside. Tech is never going to create this utopia, the promises of inventions of in past like steam engines, nuclear power, smart phones, crypto currency, social media all were very different from the actual reality. Why should this be any different? This is not about improving humanity, it's about a few wanting to become insanely rich.
The issue with open source in LLMs is that in the past you could just run most opensource software on a toaster. You could use postgresql on a raspberry pi, launch nginx or apache phpmyadmin on anything and you could just buy a cheap server by any private provider. Now two things are at play which are huge. First there is the cloud which is pretty restrictive and means that even if you use open source models, google, amazon, microsoft or other big tech companies are going to charge you for the compute (which is the most expensive part nowadays) The second thing is that most of those models are huge, even a 7b model is not realistically runnable on a computer without beefy GPUs, everybody is using A100s or H100s (except maybe aws which uses more smaller GPUs), so even with the open source movement, compute is going to limit that and mean that all that work done by opensource teams which does not benifit them will benefit a lot to big tech companies. And as small projects know that using GPUs as a service for inference is crazy expensive (something like 4000$ for 10 days of mixtral 8x7B) people will use services like bedrock which are cheaper for them but are also more advantageous for big tech companies So in the end, the opensource community is just filling big tech's cup even more. We're doomed unless someone finds out quantisation which makes it viable to run on CPUs without waiting 1 hour between answers. Also there is a GPU shortage meaning that even though a company would want to start a new inference service they would struggle to get the compute.
Get Ollama and then let it grab the LLM's for you to test on your computer locally. I can do it even on a Raspberry Pi5. Once you can run Agents locally then things get interesting and usable locally.
This is what will happen. Only big companies have the money and resources to train AI to do human level tasks. Like, drive a car. Deliver goods and services. Provide transport. Etc
You never answered, how they are lying? AI is humanity changing. Altman put a light on AI the industry like no one else. I wonder why your entire TH-cam channel for the past year has been around AI.
@@LovingSoul61 I did watch the entire video, and here are the key points I took away from it: The host started by saying she has a "feeling" that big tech is lying about AI, which is a weak premise to begin with. She then makes a sweeping generalization about mid to high level business executives not using AI in a valuable way, without providing concrete evidence. Next, she claims companies are overhyping their AI products just to get VC funding. While this may happen in some cases, she paints the entire industry with a broad brush. The video then shows clips of tech leaders stating AI is humanity-changing. I don't see the lie here. AI will monumentally change humanity and impact everyone now and in the future. Acknowledging the transformative potential of AI is not an exaggeration. She also boasts about the open source AI community, which seems out of place in a video claiming big tech is lying. Throughout the video, the host relies heavily on dramatization and storytelling rather than presenting a well-reasoned, fact-based argument. Ultimately, this video fails to coherently support its central claim that big tech is lying about AI. It comes across more as a promotion for HubSpot than a serious critique of the industry. So in summary, I did watch the full video, and I found its arguments to be weak, inconsistent, and lacking in substance. The host makes bold claims without proper evidence and relies on vague feelings rather than facts. Sources Myself
There is a general perception amongst the leaders in AI and I must say that perception is a male driven vehicle of profit making modes. There is something about the female perception when not driven by a male story that sees you the illusion of progress. Men when confronted with this fight exceptionally confronting. To make money out of making money is not the process of AI to live a better life yes, but not to have because you cannot cook a robot to clean up for you and Cook for you we are useless except to solve a problem which doesn't really exist. The problem is the lack of work to feed our soul not to solve a problem to get a solution in the future. This is a male futility occupying themselves with activity complex activity but a distraction nevertheless. There are serious questions to be answered which is mainly what is life and where we going with it.
At its current level, AI is more of a buzzword that generates a lot of popularity and encourages a lot of VC funding. I don't speak from a place of authority nor do I have a ton of experience, but I feel like its the next big hype train maybe similar to how crypto was a couple of years back? Do I see AI becoming a tool that can advance humanity? Definitely! But the tools need to become more advanced and capable of many functions.
Thanks for posting this. I have also tried to replicate results from some of these companies and been unable. I didn't have time to look into it further... just figured it was me.
Modern AI is pretty cool. There's a lot of cool, useful things that can be done with it. The problem is most of these companies producing seemingly impressive demonstrations aren't actually doing any kind of foundational improvement on the technology. They're just throwing more compute power at the problem. Almost all the "progress" being demonstrated is just dumping more and more and more processing power at the training and model. It's not sustainable, and I don't just mean that in an environmental sense. This is the reason Sam Altman was asking for such ridiculous amounts of investment earlier this year--it's not going into "research". It's going into pushing more GPUs into the compute clusters. EDIT: A bit concerning that you think government is the answer, though. The government are the ones who created the policies and incentives that allowed this insane grift to happen in the first place.
Ai is like that one student that you thought was going to go really far after high school. Then you find out they got a girl preg does drugs and works at the local gas station.
If UBI will work in the US then other countries will consider to adopt it, even authoritarian ones but maybe except the most harsh and poor ones like North Korea, DRK, Somalia ecc.
@@greenlime8726If US is against free healthcare. Which is pretty important. What makes you think they'll start giving everyone free money, in perpetuity?
@@alexanderrahl482 Actually nothing, I don't think it will be ever introduced. Introduction of UBI would be harder than abolishing electoral college or passing to a proportional system.
Beeing a programmer doesn't give you any knowledge about ai. I'm a programmer myself and a lot of my Colleges don't know amything about ai. And if you ever used ai to program you know it's not just smoke
@@kecksbelit3300 You do realize that AI algorithms are written by programmers, don't you? Yes, AI programs (like any other program) can produce results (not very good results, generally speaking), but they operate on algorithms that merely mimic or create the illusion of intelligence. It's similar to how, watching a puppet show, you begin to believe the puppets are actually alive and invested with life; but it's all just an illusion. They are blocks of wood on strings. In the same way, there is nothing intelligent about AI; it's all mimicry. Computers can be used to analyze data and make predictions (which, incidentally, are often entirely wrong due to missing parameters, bad modelling, and gaps in the programmer's understanding of the thing he is trying to model) and that can sometimes be a very useful tool, but calling it Artificial Intelligence is misleading and pretentious. It doesn't have one iota of intelligence.
Yes, it remains to be seen who really stands to benefit from emerging AI tech. I think we can assume it won’t be for the wellbeing and wealth of the vast majority of humanity. If anything it will likely increase the gap between the haves and the have nots. But, we’ll see…
The people in India worked on tasks related to supporting the accuracy of Just Walk Out technology, but it wasn't exactly "viewing your purchases" live. Here's a breakdown of their role: Training the AI: They likely reviewed video snippets to help train the machine learning algorithms that power Just Walk Out. This could involve labelling items in videos to teach the AI how to identify products correctly. Verifying Inaccurate Scans: In some cases, the automated system might not perfectly track what a customer picks up or puts down. These reviewers would likely analyze short video clips of those situations to ensure the customer's bill reflects what they actually bought. It's important to understand that they weren't directly monitoring every customer's shopping trip. Their role was more behind-the-scenes, focused on improving the technology's accuracy. Here's a different way to think about it: Imagine you're training a self-driving car. You might show it videos of streets and sidewalks to help it recognize objects like cars and pedestrians. That's similar to what the reviewers in India were doing for Just Walk Out.
Thanks for the positive spin, but this is likely the new job after the one replaced by 'AI'. I think I'd prefer sit in the cash register, chit chating with the customers.
I love how Amazon got called out and some circles started calling AI "Actually Indians". As an online worker, a lot of my income comes from training AI. It's nowhere near groundbreaking technology yet. But it's definitely going to be useful in the future. Over hyped as heck. But my investments are happy.
Hi I'm Ritesh and this year in 2024 I'm going to college for my Btech degree in artificial intelligence and data science course. What laptop should I buy for heavy machine learning tasks and others things related to my field as well as for competitive programming, video editing as in davinci resolve, etc... But mainly I want a professional laptop for me. I'm even willing to wait for the new M4 MacBook Pro or the new arm based windows that are coming this year for the best professional laptop for my field that I will be using for the next 7-8 years and at least 5-6 years. What should I buy? Can you suggest? Thanking in advance.
I work in big tech, you're right, it's not about making life better for humans. It's about replacing expensive tech workers and concentrating wealth in the C-level, SVP, and VP class. Even directors are treated like peasants now. But the reality is that "a technology once invented cannot be uninvented", so the best we can do is be the ones that make AI a reality. Knowledge workers that work only on a computer should be the most scared -- lawyers, radiologist doctors, telemedicine doctors, software engineers, customer support agents, etc. More people will get access to these services, but really the productivity gains will be usurped by the execs. As for this utopian UBI world -- it's going to be like the matrix, they'll give out just enough money to keep you alive spinning the energy-generating hamster wheel. It won't be like Wall-E and also wont' be completely dystopian either. Altman is actually the biggest snake, remember he tried to harvest biometric data from poor countries by handing out BS cryptocurrencies.
I will be 💯 honest as an AI optimist I was a little pessimistic in the beginning of the video. But glad I watched the whole thing. Quality video and a great nuanced approach. You gained a new sub.
It eventually will. Improvements in manufacturing will lead to cheaper materials for construction, which will lead to cheaper houses. Main issue really is zoning laws. If more high rises are built then property prices will drop. Homelessness is much more complicated though. Mental health issues are usually involved so modernized Sanitariums would be a good idea.
@@tesserae-c2y don't be fooled. materials have gone way down already. just like underlying food commodities and the cost of producing electricity all having dropped by around 70% yet prices remain sky high. the issue is all our basic human needs are being exploited to maximize profits by colluding mega corps and congress. just have a look at their portfolios.
@@juanmacias5922 What it did do though was change the dynamics of how things are bought and sold but crucially how we're being pushed into buying stuff. We use services like Facebook which are for-all-intents-and-purposes "free at the point of use" but at the cost of being combarded with adverts/commercials, AND we're basically being spied on. I sometimes wish FB was just a paid service; No one wants to art with their money if they don't need to but I'd rather that than big brother.
I've realized the gap between richest and poorest keeps getting bigger but, that microphone you're sitting in front of, 40 years ago would have cost you $10,000. Insanely expensive prototypes that lead to cheap mass produced versions do work.
The only environment they building is a monthly fee not owning what you are buying, getting banned environment where you constantly need to pay for stuff in a biweekly cycle!
So is it fake or is it dangerous? You’re arguing both but it can’t be that dangerous if it’s just people in the background like it’s always been anyway.
Perhaps a bit of both? I feel like its a massive buzzword that just generates a ton of interest in its current state and a lot of VC funding. We'll see if it remains fake or dangerous.
At the moment, it's neither, this person is purely speculating with no real tangible proof. As someone who works for one of the companies mentioned in this, I can assure you that it's real, but it's a long ways off from replacing everyone and resulting in the need for UBI or human destruction...
I like the punchline of this video - pro regulation. Yet that's what big tech companies want - to regulate it, so that startups would die in infancy. She either doesn't understand that, or... Well, she was working for Meta, right? And Meta is not at all evil.
anyways, I think your argument is a bit confused here.. is it that AI doesn't work, that it is a scam just to get money? I personally know that that isn't true - it makes me at least an order of magnitude more productive, and millions of people using it can't really be that wrong. is your argument that the AI VCs are being disingenuous when they say it could be a massive leap forward or the biggest disaster in human history? It's hard to square that considering - at least in the interviews I've seen - they've given equal time to either outcome. Is your argument that they are scamming investors out of money? The reason that people have been pouring investment into AI is not because of where AI is now, but because they see the possibility of where AI WILL BE. You also neglect advancements of AI that are truly breathtaking - LLMs are spectactular in themselves, but advances in chip design and manufacture, network infrastructure, manufacture all due to AI, and AI driven science are just as impressive. DeepMind beat go in 2016 - an awe inspiring task in itself - but AlphaFold is a true revolution. Before AlphaFold It took one PHD to turn a sequenced protein into its 3 dimensional representation. AlphaFold basically sped up that process a billionfold. Now, pretty much every protein we know of has a 3D shape. And they have done the same with materials science, and will go on to most likely do the same thing with drug discovery. I get the pit in the stomach feeling here - when the odds of extinction are anywhere between 0% and 90% depending on who you talk to, but one thing you can't say of AI is that it is a lie.
How is it betterment for humanity when AI replace job and people need to live on UBI? Open source AI or not. Most of the population will need to get handout from a government that is losing public trust lately? How is that good for democracy ? What if the government suddenly decided to stop giving handouts?
The reason these guys are feeding us the catastrophic "AI risk" scenarios is that when we discuss if this thing is gonna rise up and kill us all, we don't discuss, if it's actually useful. And if it isn't actually a little crap.
Openai just published regulation. They want to track GPUs. They want controlled weights and AI. Openai is the most dangerous factor right now. I am still sure that the whole Sam Altman incident was not for nothing and is downplayed too much.
With the broken theory of trickle down economics, the Panama papers exposed a ton of wealthy hide their holdings in offshore low tax or no tax nations. A great example in the tech sector is Ireland, which has basically given huge tax breaks to wealthy multinational corporations, so you will find all the big names there, Google, Meta etc. I don't know if people know this, but capitalism failed many centuries ago. Today, 38% of the US economy is run by federal government jobs and once you account for contract labor, the government of the USA employs 68% to 71% of the country, depending on some semantics about what qualifies, with some people arguing certain service jobs only exist because of this spending etc, as economics is muddy water. The entire point of AI is these people want to replace you, simple as that, they know we can't keep going the way we are and they think they can run machine versions of you for less energy and take more of the planet for themselves. Money is broken and has been for 5,000 years and the fact we can't grow up and accept that stuff is broken will be our own undoing.
The hype is incredible. The investment is astronomical. To live up to this hype and produce stable results would be very hard. I just do not see what in llm tech can actually produce intelligence that can be trusted to be accurate. A search engine with nicer presentation, yes. Likely a very inefficient and slow one… But if something is only 80% correct, and you do not know which 20% is wrong, don’t you have to reevaluate the whole thing manually?
The "cost of labor" is humans working. If no humans are working they will have Zero income which means $0 to spend on goods or services. This means that the wealthy who control the means of production will be unable to Sell the goods and services they're producing for almost nothing. This would break the economy. Idk is that's what Sam Altman is explicitly referring to, but that's been my view of what's going to happen. We have to put enough pressure to force a socioeconomic paradigm that no longer relies on human labor to enable human survival. I personally have believed that AI taking over human labor will force this change by virtue of breaking the economy, with only three real possible outcomes - The proletariat will either have to fend for ourselves and make an economic system of our own while the wealthy circle jerk themselves into oblivion, or we'll have to force a full shift to a more human well being focused socioeconomic system, Oooorrrr, we all ignore everything and wipe ourselves out. So I guess what I'm saying is, I agree we need to be active in our role in pushing the winds of this change towards a more human friendly paradigm, but also I think regardless, there's no way our current socioeconomic paradigm comes through the AI revolution unchanged, and that as long as we ARE taking an active role in ensuring it goes the right direction, there's real hope for a better future at the end of it.
It's all salemen telling you how great their product is to convince you to buy. I do not understand how people can still trust them after all these years.
3:20 "Not too much." People, read and remember this, because market economy worked, works and will work like this forever: "Capital eschews no profit, or very small profit, just as Nature was formerly said to abhor a vacuum. With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 per cent. will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 per cent. certain will produce eagerness; 50 per cent., positive audacity; 100 per cent. will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 per cent., and there is not a crime at which it will scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged. If turbulence and strife will bring a profit, it will freely encourage both. Smuggling and the slave-trade have amply proved all that is here stated." - Thomas Joseph Dunning. P.S. These words were even quoted by Karl Marx in his famous great work "Capital".
Learn how to use AI at work with Hubspot's FREE AI for GTM bundle: clickhubspot.com/u2o
I have a question, because many people are just faking morals and serving still the corrupt. Since long I made AI design, I am working to publish it, I also put it my master thesis as a safe copyright, bound to science. I have this design since long for a smart AI, way pior to the AI boom, when I tried to find business partners the AI boom happened. I suspect its theft. A counter measure is an open source community. My university threatens to sue me, if I publish my critic towards the theme of the subject I made my degree, and the entire thesis is a take down of that science with critic, while I was kicked out prior from my masters and got in by press pressure. I was told any public statement will be used to sue me, if it damages their reputation or of that science. The truth cannot be sued though, it is documented in written form. How would you suggest to contribute to the open source community. I also need financial stability to take care of my family, though. Maybe you can do a video on it. TH-cam showed me this video. This is not a lie, in doubt it is a question of open source community and how to contribute or connect to it and maybe a video to it.
To those who think I don’t know the difference between trickle down economics and UBI, what I’m saying is that Sam preaches UBI and does things aligned with trickle down economics. Not that they are the same. They are in fact the opposite.
Now this part is just my opinion but I personally have a general distrust of governments (just like tech companies) saying they will do these things unless their is monetary incentive for them to do so. It’ll be great if it happens but I’m not holding my breath on it and securing myself regardless.
@@TinaHuang1 I agree with you. A few differences maybe... the openAI maybe started with good an genuine inclinations,, but they got "corrupted" by the fame, money, power... a bit of the good life. I don't know. But your point Is very strong.
9:41 One very important note: "Trickle down economics" is a BS, strawman, theory that no economist has ever created or defended and is use only by political actors (politicians, bureaucrats, think tanks and activist), manly by the left and some people on the right who are economically illiterate.
Basically, the trickle down "theory" is as much of an ECONOMIC THEORY as the Amazon Go "AI" is an ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE!
Other than this one, great video.
@@TinaHuang1UBI is a total lie. It just drives up inflation, benefitting the wealthy. UBI does nothing to increase the quantity or quality of goods and services available to the public.
UBS (Universal Basic Services) is the opposite UBI.
UBS is the future.
The rebranding of Linear Algebra as "Artificial Intelligence" may be the most successful marketing campaing of all time.
The Department of War to Department of Defense.
@@Lonovavir Ahhh, that's smart.
@@Lonovavir Minister of the Environment = pillager of the land, minister of weather modification
As a math tutor, this info will probably blow the minds of my high school students (if they can make that connection) lol
People pushed the name AI. You didn’t hear OpenAI touting GPT2 or 3 as “real AI”. Sam Altman said anyone could have built chat GPT and no one would. Anyone working in “AI” knows LLMs are good tools but not AGI or whatever you want to call it.
I have almost zero doubts that we will end up in a cyberpunk, low-life and high-tech future, rather than a solarpunk one. Every millimeter of breathing room we gain from tech advancements which could benefit the workers, will be used to disproportionally benefit the people at the top and further the class divide.
Kinda agree but it'll be better (if u mean cyber punk as the game not the just the style)
keep fear mongering, doomer Luddite.
@@nhinged they mean as in the concept of cyberpunk coined way before the games and before Mike Pondsmith wrote his first RPG. They are not talking about style neither.
@@rcapp85 that's what I meant by style but thanks
The future will be better than you and i can imagine not everything from movies comes true
Anything the ruling class promotes benefits the ruling class. Whether or not it benefits anyone else has no relation to whether or not they'll promote it. Most AI I've used has very clear establishment-aligned bias.
Exactly they spew mainstream narrative what else do u see is establishment aligned his
"ruling class" 😂 you are the ruling class to someone else.
@@Geekgaucho you have no idea what badfeng means. "ruling class" means billionaires, top ceo's at certain mega corporations, eg pfizer, and the big banks, european royalty, international group founders like
WEF's Klaus Schwab, WHO's Ghebreyesus, etc, and people that are regulars at things like bilderberg, and davos. Elected politicians can generally be excluded - they are the pawns used by the ruling class, but sometimes there's crossover.
The middle class and poor are the ones ruled, schmucks like you and me, and the homeless and kids who don't own shoes in africa, etc.
@@Geekgaucho Yeah to my cat. Your point didn't even invalidate their point. When looking up hurts your neck so hard, you might wanna train your neck a little more 😘(sorry but a bit sassiness is required sometimes)
In Capitalism, capital accumulates with capital and capital rules. Look at wikipedia article "Distribution of wealth" and than think again. While you are not entirely wrong, 88% percent of people hold 15% of power (as of 2021). So please put your world view in perspective.
Nevertheless have a nice time stranger. 🤗
Establishment-aligned bias is 100% correct, sadly. First questions I asked showed that it toes the line in every way. It's mainstream everything and overly PC to so it can't be favouring the truth as a priority.
Most people have lost the ability for rational logical thinking so they don't even notice.
I saw an example of an AI even saying thermonuclear war would would be better than misgendering Katlin Jenner.
For the record Katlin Jenner said she'd rather be misgendered than the other option.
With AI "open-source" is a misleading term as there is almost no source. "Open Weights" is a term that has emerged to describe models where the weights and biases are released, but not the training data and sadly this describes the majority of "open-source" models. I'd argue models without training data are closed-source "free-beer" as their training data remains closed, and in the AI paradigm the data IS the source. There are a few truly open-source models out there that released their training data along with their weights and biases, but let's not get hoodwinked by people who characterize "free models" as "open-source". They are not. To be "open-source" they need release the training data and processes required to rebuild them from scratch.
I suspect the users who have free access and use these system contribute to the training process.
We all imagined Ai would be used to solve complex issues; Fusion, global warming, cancer, world hunger, etc... But now that it's here, all the corporations are clamming to jam out agents as replacements of human labor in every single job imaginable. I have a hard time imagining this will end well.
But there's still many cases where AI doesn't fully replace human labor, so it's not even capable of doing that effectively. What's really going to be the death knell is the realization that AI is being jammed into pre-existing products without providing much benefit- "AI-powered search" is one of the more egregious examples
@@MegaMEGATRUCK Yes, there will be an AI bubble that will burst indeed. The issue behind of all the main societal problems we are facing as a species these days remains the same. Its this world wide scale scam of how the investment markets work and evolved since the second half of the 20th Century.
For instance in McDonalds there is a touch screen to select your order. So it's not even needed AI to replace labour, you can just use a simple program and a screen to replace cashiers.
you forgot to take capitalism into account
I didn't. And I don't believe AI will replace most jobs. It will just make jobs easier and give companies an excuse for mass layoffs. But that doesn't mean they can let the machine alone.
AI costs a lot of electricity so while it might give us smart grids, everything else AI will increase energy demands more than smart grids can possibly optimize. And generally the quality of many things will degrade as big tech is demonstrating to us right now. The real danger I see is how much trust people and govts will put into AI and us failing to recognize deepfakes in the long term.
You have to keep in mind that it's company that decide about hiring and firing people and govts that write the rules for that
So Sam Altman is just a business man that happened to invest in OpenAI, and when that little fish turned out to be a pot of gold then he started to pose as great AI visionary? Hilarious turn of events 😂
Is it a pot of gold though? Is there a long-term profitable business there?
@@andrewhooper7603 The long term aspect matters far less. Yes, it is a pot of gold simply because it's hype driven right now and investors threw money at him, just as much as they threw at Nvidia. That stock simply expanded in one year.
If the whole AI thing busts within one year, he will still be far richer than 2 years ago.
@@andrewhooper7603 The hope behind the business plan is scaling laws matter which will act as a moat of sorts. They've made $2 billion in revenue after spending a few hundred million. So from their perspective everything makes sense still.
A) Their proclaimed hope is scaling laws continue to at least agi, but hoping for asi and use it like a cheat code of value creation.
B) More realistic their business is multimodal ai that can automate tasks against a handful of other large rivals who can also afford the large upfront costs.
~Speed of inference & reasoning is needed for real time agents however bc of their statelessness they would still require thorough prompt crafting, rag, and scaffolding
~ modalities (vision) for apps and "seeing" the screen,
~media manipulation/creation (video, image)
~Larger context windows for being able to "see" larger texts, documents, codebases
The short of it is larger models can better learn from their training.
Is there a long-term profitable business?
Well let's assume that B) is more realistic, then it depends on whether they can out compete or survive alongside the larger players.
Even if google is behind or faking it, they could just offer cheaper services to pry customers off and as for MS who knows what the future holds.
If they were alone, I'd say yes their business of gate keeping Large ai model services is profitable. Honest answer is I do not know what the future holds other than expect ai, but they are profitable atm.
Likely future within 10 years:
-at least be able to manipulate images & videos quite easily esp in a piece wise manner like boxinator & krea & adobe functionality
-Real Time agents able to control the screen however possibly silly or forgetful or meh-quality if no breakthrough is made in statefulness.
-Agents embodied in Robots will be real, but may be limited to 'tasks' due to the statelessness issue. Tasks may be learned via a download or via tele-operation or watching the human given a low amount of examples.
@@andrewhooper7603The hope behind the business plan is scaling laws matter which will act as a moat of sorts. They've made $2 billion in revenue after spending a few hundred million. So from their perspective everything makes sense still.
A) Their proclaimed hope is scaling laws continue to at least agi, but hoping for asi and use it like a cheat code of value creation.
B) More realistic their business is multimodal ai that can automate tasks against a handful of other large rivals who can also afford the large upfront costs.
~Speed of inference & reasoning is needed for real time agents however bc of their statelessness they would still require thorough prompt crafting, rag, and scaffolding
~ modalities (vision) for apps and "seeing" the screen,
~media manipulation/creation (video, image)
~Larger context windows for being able to "see" larger texts, documents, codebases
The short of it is larger models can better learn from their training.
Is there a long-term profitable business?
Well let's assume that B) is more realistic, then it depends on whether they can out compete or survive alongside the larger players.
Even if google is behind or faking it, they could just offer cheaper services to pry customers off and as for MS who knows what the future holds.
If they were alone, I'd say yes their business of gate keeping Large ai model services is profitable. But it could become a race to the bottom. Honest answer is I do not know what the future holds other than expect ai, but they are profitable atm.
Likely future within 10 years:
-at least be able to manipulate images & videos quite easily esp in a piece wise manner like boxinator & krea & adobe functionality
-Real Time agents able to control the screen however possibly silly or forgetful or meh-quality if no breakthrough is made in statefulness.
-Agents embodied in Robots will be real, but may be limited to 'tasks' due to the statelessness issue. Tasks may be learned via a download or via tele-operation or watching the human given a low amount of examples.
@@andrewhooper7603
The hope behind the business plan is scaling laws matter which will act as a moat of sorts. They've made $2 billion in revenue after spending a few hundred million. So from their perspective everything makes sense still.
A) Their proclaimed hope is scaling laws continue to at least agi, but hoping for asi and use it like a cheat code of value creation.
B) More realistic their business is multimodal ai that can automate tasks against a handful of other large rivals who can also afford the large upfront costs.
~Speed of inference & reasoning is needed for real time agents however bc of their statelessness they would still require thorough prompt crafting, rag, and scaffolding
~ modalities (vision) for apps and "seeing" the screen,
~media manipulation/creation (video, image)
~Larger context windows for being able to "see" larger texts, documents, codebases
The short of it is larger models can better learn from their training.
Is there a long-term profitable business?
Well let's assume that B) is more realistic, then it depends on whether they can out compete or survive alongside the larger players.
Even if google is behind or faking it, they could just offer cheaper services to pry customers off and as for MS who knows what the future holds.
If they were alone, I'd say yes their business of gate keeping Large ai model services is profitable. But it could become a race to the bottom. Honest answer is I do not know what the future holds other than expect ai, but they are profitable atm.
Likely future within 10 years:
-at least be able to manipulate images & videos quite easily esp in a piece wise manner like boxinator & krea & adobe functionality
-Real Time agents able to control the screen however possibly silly or forgetful or meh-quality if no breakthrough is made in statefulness.
-Agents embodied in Robots will be real, but may be limited to 'tasks' due to the statelessness issue. Tasks may be learned via a download or via tele-operation or watching the human given a low amount of examples.
Look at all of the technology and productivity gained since 1938 40hrs work week in the Labor Standards Act, has any of the productivity gained resulted in 1 less hour of work?
or given anyone earlier retirement or more vacations? So every time you hear "more productivity" ask for who?
Vacations ? Today if you take vacations, when you come back, your job is gone.
the people coding themselves out of jobs i.e. building these AI, don't work onky 40 hrs a week. 40 hrs a week is a joke and has been since the advent the "salaried" employee.
Very fair point. We live in a system that puts other down in order to lift a few up. Many rules of this system are finely tuned to make sure this happens without making it obvious who is to blame for it.
And no one is really talking about the vices that do most of the work that everyone just accepts as a natural part of human life.
Example: property tax and mortgages. Utter dependance on corporations. And all kinds of fun little local laws that somehow got homoginized throughout the U.S. in under a few decades. No one is questioning who these things really benefit or even putting critical thought in how they came to be. At least not that I have seen yet. Ai is just going to go right in the center of the toolbox of the shadowy force that brought all these other things about which we now don't even notice because they sit in plain sight.
@@John5iveyeah it’s going to be very funny when these dudes realize the rich don’t want to take care of people they don’t need to do labor. Once AI gets good enough they are just going to let a lot of people die
Most humans aren't ready for having limitless free time. Chaos would ensue. We evolved through millions of years of struggle. Our brains can't handle not having to struggle. We'd have to replace useful work that will be done by AI in future with some kind of other competitive endeavours like enforced participation in competitive sports in order to earn our UBI cheque.
Long time ago power was in the hand of the king. The biggest lie is that the power is in the hands of the people. Power is in the hands of a few and they don’t want you to have it. In other words “nothing is free”.
Well the few are just more organized because well they are few, but the real power is always in the hands of the people, who get organized when the need calls for it. When the ambition and foolishness of those in power fill the quota that takes for the whole to organize, that is the time their rule ends.
I still strongly believe truth is stranger than fiction and that one day we'll find out the reason why the few were so organized and how they kept power in their families for centuries. And that will be quite the disgusting revelation.
@@Xfacter We already know that and it is disgusting, having to do with murder, indoctrination, misinformation, incest, single inheritor, etc. I think you would like the work by the late great Jordan Maxwell.
Most kings in history had responsibilities towards their people. If they didn't protect them, they would be replaced, conspired against, assassinated or just pushed out of power.
Nowadays, big companies have no responsibilities, they only care about profits, not one bit about employees (unless it serves them into making more money). And they absolutely don't care about city infrastructures and social advancement.
That's why pure capititalism is very dangerous.
As they say, 'if it's free, your the product'.
When Billionaire Rich folk says I am donating 90% of my wealth to philanthropy, they mean they will give it to their own charitable foundation they started with their children in control, where only a trickle of income of the foundation goes to donation and rest is kept and used by their own families.
to avoid taxes
That is a complete lie.
Joe That is absolutely true. That is what most of them are doing. Bill Gates is funneling his "donations" to his own charity corporation (pro profit), gets full tax exemption and then funnels it all back to himself.
And one more thing when you go to fast food chains and any big business where they collect donations for kids, women and other social issues to show they are supporting these cause and look good in front of public so they make more money but they don't giveaway any money from their corporation to the above causes😂😂😂
Philanthropy is a big tax dodge scam for the wealthy.
The main reason that Big Tech wants government regulation of "AI" is they can't compete with the small agile and open source developers.
Just... like... every... other... industry!
People keep saying capitalism is the problem when it’s literally the only solution
Government regulations aka socialism is what got is here
@@nobodythenobody9779 Bingo. All these supposedly altruistic moguls always seem to do pretty well despite spouting Universal Basic Income as the solution to all society's problems.
Moreover, "Trickle Down Economics" does work, and works extremely well. It's just that the people (i.e. Westerners) expecting to get the table scraps are often surprised to discover that they're already really the world's 1% and there's a LOT of hungry mouths lower on the social pyramid.
@@nobodythenobody9779government regulation is completely necessary to protect society from the unscrupulous and greedy who simply want to exploit society and the advancement of tech for monetary gain at any expense to the populations health and the environment it lives in. Just look at what has happened with oil and gas, and the tendrils it has in every function in society, and the damage it is doing, and will do within the lifetime of a human born today, damage it knew would happen, and covered up, denied and obfuscated for as long as possible before switching to a 'oh its too late too stop, we can only transition (to the inconveniently less profitable) renewables at a glacial pace, have to rely on sham or dangerous tech fantasies like carbon capture or cloud seeding, and fake tree planting carbon credit schemes whitewashing companies everwhere, its the only serious sensible option, sorry about that'
Capitalism has the same problem as communism, it becomes too corrupt. The big difference is the current version of capitalism will ultimately collapse not just human civilisation but the conditions in the environment humans need to even survive. Capitalism simply had a slower burn and more success before it inflicts a worse impact than the anything communism ever caused.
Global devastation, mass migration,war, millions dead from famine and disease. This is the guaranteed by physics result of staying the current course. Yet you think the solution is not only more of the same but worse?? Thats what lower regulation would bring. Worse and sooner.
You are being so misled by bad actors who only have the interests of the megarich in mind and its crazy how common it is to see this view because its actually crazy.
@@nobodythenobody9779 Capitalism is the problem ... if capitalism doesn't mean you can use your possessions in the most efficient way possible (see minimalism)
The goverment stopping inflation by taking money out of the system and redirecting that money to a select group of people who need it the most has been wildly unpopular. Dumb people like that should be forced to follow an economics course. Followed by a basic human decency retrainment camp.
To those who think I don’t know the difference between trickle down economics and UBI, what I’m saying is that Sam preaches UBI and does things aligned with trickle down economics. Not that they are the same. They are in fact the opposite.
Now this part is just my opinion but I personally have a general distrust of governments (just like tech companies) saying they will do these things unless their is monetary incentive for them to do so. It’ll be great if it happens but I’m not holding my breath on it and securing myself regardless.
Kinda weird how far I had to scroll to see your comment on your own video... TH-cam are you being sus again? 🤨
@ccordyceps dude what a goofy comment. If your angle against her argument is anti techbology fear mongering then it's incredibly weak lol. But what else do you have to work with 🤷♂️
Isnt it spelled "get educated" tho
@@siloporcen
@@siloporcen 'Your' is actually correct in this usage since it is a possessive, as in, 'your angle'. If the user had used the term 'you're' as you had suggested, it would have been 'you are angle'.
In response to the original point; I wouldn't necessarily call it fear mongering, it's more like assessing a game board and potential problems. Ultimately the base point of the video with corporations/governments screwing people in the name of 'the good of humanity' is fair. It's a shame when the tech or the ideals are good, but the people are not.
C'est la vie.
The "general distrust of governments" has been culturally driven by the 1% over the last 40 years, while at the same time that 1% has essentially taken over governance for their own ends. It's the perfect scam. Convince the masses that government is bad, while at the same time defund the government through massive tax breaks for the wealthy draining resources that could otherwise serve those same masses.
Ask anyone in Sweden for instance if they would trade the government services they get, with the situation in the US. Sweden has what is referred to as the Nordic Economic System, and while it isn't perfect, it allows private enterprise to co-exist alongside a strong socialist framework that provides services such as a national healthcare system including dental, vision, etc at a fraction of the cost (paid for by taxes, but less spent per capita than what people in the US pay for premiums for high deductible policies), free university education to those whose grades qualify them for it, etc.
There is historic inequality in the US, and it is because for the last four decades the 1% has been winning the class wars that they started.
The chances that the 1% will back, or pay for a UBI in the US is exactly zero, so I essentially agree with your intuition on that.
A lot of what is being referred to as AI is more like advanced automation, backed by massive amounts of data, and feeding through language modeling.
Of course, that's why it's called *Artificial* Intelligence and not just Intelligence. It amazes me how many people are disappointed that these systems aren't actually sentient and just giving the illusion of intelligence. The A part does actually mean something.
@@SteveMHN It is funny when people think it's sentient or could be haha. Like electronic integrated circuits could ever be sentient.
1:30
“It all hit me the other day how AI’s use in Big Tech is unsettling…..anyways here’s an ad to learn how to use large language models in enterprise businesses/big tech”
The irony is jarring 😅
Came straight to comments to find this. I thought she was joking!!!
Literally, just saw this after making my own comment... It is ridiculously true.
I had the same thought. Be she isn't criticizing LLM. She criticizes big tech and the way they handle "AI".
Its a sellout world baby!
If trickle down economy worked than why did the gap between rich and poor widen so much if we compare the top 1% (income gain 160.3%) compared to the bottom fifth of households (income gain 26%)? And if we take the top 0.1% the gap is even larger (income gain 345.2%). This data is from 1979 till 2019.
Clearly we must give the rich even MORE money.
Regan! Trump! Regan! Trump!
Trickle down trick, oldest long running modern scam in existence.
@@wobblyboost The economy is a Ponzi scheme. It's collapsed multiple times too - and the government props it back up again by printing more paper..
I once called Sam Altman a real life Bond villain...and I haven't changed my mind
Agree. I would add pretty much everyone of fame coming out of Silicon Valley, including Elon & Thiel. The Paypal mafia.
Many of them are just frontmen.
The sponsor was really just AI
Was actually laughing about the irony of it all!
THIS...!@@chewyyy8602 AI is the beginning post-truth age
It’s really hard to understand. Is it lack of awareness, surrender, simply not caring? What a credibility killer. I stopped watching
@@nuvotion-live I hear you, but I think its hilarious that she got an AI company to sponsor a video talking about how shit AI is
@@andrewjmichael I agree, it’s hilarious in that it’s totally absurd. But it didn’t seem purposely ironic so it left me very confused
Feels great to hear someone not only say what needs to be said about big tech AI, but in front of a large audience. This may be your best video yet, at least in this vein of video.
She fell off and is trying to be controversial to get more views. I'm in an AI team for call centers and there's so much AI is doing especially with Whisper and GPT. She doesn't understand how much trash pre-AI software there is.
@@casperd2100 you missed the point, it's about Big Tech AI and billionaires not AI in general. Maybe it's time to step aside and let AI do your job
@@zurgesmiecal I will let/step aside for AI to do my job when the time comes. Big tech will say whatever to make the investors happy. That's literally how every business works. You think a company will spill the secrets of what it's doing internally? This is what doing data science all day does to a person. Brain rot.
This opinion was extremely half baked...
Actually most all was false
Also:
Sam was "huge" on making sure UBI became a thing. More recently he said that everyone should get a UCI or some crud that means Universal Compute Income (ergo, free time on on the AIs).
I'm like, uh.. how is that gonna pay my rent and feed me?
Having spent the last 10 years doing AI & ML, the biggest problem is it doesn't actually work. Sure, you might get a single digit improvement, but it's hardly worth the time & $$$$. Yeah, people can come up with great, stunning examples. But they are just examples.....
How can you work on something that doesn't work for 10 years!?
Seriously though, there are so many things that weren't possible at all that are now possible thanks to AI. It can't do everything but there are things it can do way better than anything that came before.
@@ArnaldurBjarnason It doesn't have to work, as long as there are investors.
What exactly can it do that couldn't be done before?
Those regulations are gonna regulate open source out of existence, and make AI a monopoly for corpos.
thank God, us woke people love when big tech and big corp take over things. we fight with the big man, not against him! that's the feminist way! yee-haa! im just another pseudo-intellectual here! go-go gadget!
Yes. But Ai is already being used by the US just look up Palantir. No doubt it used Ai to scan the posts we make and actions we take. Its essentially a "pre-crime" system and it is disgusting. Someone should do a video on it, im sure it would rake in the views 😄👍
No shit, that’s why the biggest backers for regulations are always megacorps.
So, regulate the AI companies? Or let the mad scientists cook? One or the other people, everyone complains and says we need to put a leash on these projects. So, we did. And of course, people then bitch and come up with conspiracies on how the leashes themselves are somehow bad. Do you want these companies to be overseen and regulated? Or do you want them to build fucking digital Gods in closets only for us to find out when it's too late?
the simple truth most aren't seeing, pretty sure the fear mongering and the art-related controversies are also manufactured by openai and them just to get the public to also ask for regulation
Many of those "open source" things you showed often run on closed source APIs. Only truly open source is things like PyTorch, open model, open weights, running your LLM locally etc.
oh thanks for pointing that out! Which ones are you referring to?
@@TinaHuang1 Meta just released LLaMa 3 which is pretty powerful and open to all except direct Meta competition.
They're mostly "open weights" at best, but the datasets and methodologies used to train these frontier models like Llama 3 are absolutely proprietary. A dissenting narrative on Meta's position to make available the model weights is their intent to capture market share in the short to medium term, but for dominance and control in the long term. Think: Google Chrome and Android's position in the market and their meteoric rise riding off the meme of open source with Chromium and AOSP respectively.
@@peter_phamous The "methodologies" are indeed also open source, often published in scientific papers, in fact the most "open source" of all the AI universe are the "methodologies". About the datasets are completely useless for anybody without huge compute power. For example llama-3 model was trained with 15 trillion tokens dataset. Do you have thousands of hard drives and tens of thousands of GPUs in your home to be able to use those datasets? Please don't make ridiculous arguments. The open weights instead are extremely useful to allow the open source community to improve those models by finetunning them with their own personal datasets.
There have been open weight/open models lately; those give you everything you need to run the AI yourself, and train it further with your own data.
THANK YOU! It's ridiculous how not many people are addressing the elephant in the room. I'd just add that the reason for their push for "safety" at this point can also be to hinder emerging companies from catching up.
'Regulation' is a as you say a tool for Big Biz to keep tiny Biz down. The administrative overhead for one man becomes so big, there is no time to work.
@@iRelevant.47.system.boycott it is not. It is smart to regulate nukes, so not every chimp can use them.
Not only do we need to support open source, but our economic system needs to change. Without changes to the economic system, as shown in the video with the trickle down illustrations, it doesn't matter what we do in the open source realm, if companies are allowed to sell us on a "Star Trek" future but actively work to deliver a "Hunger Games" or "Blade Runner" future, we are all doomed. This doom is not the product of AI technology, it is the product of greed and capitalism. Every technology that increases worker productivity can be thrown into the same bucket as AI, where the bosses use these technologies to increase profit, via increase in worker productivity, without delivering any benefit for the worker. In fact, quite the opposite. As worker productivity increases, less and less workers will eventually be needed, increasing unemployment and lowering the negotiation power of the worker, due to surplus in the workforce. This adds up to a downward spiral for the worker.
The worker should not be in a position to hope that the bosses trickle down benefit. The workers should be the bosses. In other words, corporations should not be shareholder owned, they should be worker owned and the benefit to the workers, for increased worker productivity, should be decided, based upon, what is good for the worker and what is good for the business, in that order. This model still does not completely address the issue with companies eventually shedding workers, due to maximally increase worker productivity. Something needs to be done about the worker that find themselves out of a job, simply due to the advancement of technology. This problem should be solved through two avenues. 1. an ever decreasing number of hours required from workers, on a day/week/month basis, without a decrease in pay. This would allow employees to keep their jobs but benefit from lower working hours and slowing the shedding of workers due to increased productivity and increase in unemployment. 2. As mentioned in the video, an establishment of a UBI system that has a tie to certain economic metrics, that allows for the UBI to be a liveable amount, without the risk of lagging behind the overall economy or allowing politicians to use it as a bargaining chip.
Good points. I disagree with the idea that corporations should be worker controlled. Unions should be able to make sure workers take part in the increased productivity.
Wealth accumulation needs to be limited, as in allows individuals or group of individuals, to rival state power i.e. a national security risk. Money needs to be kept out of politics, and lobbyists and donors needs to be shown the door.
@@iRelevant.47.system.boycott I agree about donors, but believe it or not, I actually think lobbyists need to be allowed. Even though we tend to think of lobbyists as people trying to influence legislators, on behalf of greedy corporations, they are also people trying to influence legislators on behalf of the likes of environmental groups, unions, victim advocacy groups, etc. etc. etc. The issue is what they use as influence. Gifts, money, job promises, campaign donations should all be banned, IMO, and information and the gaining or loss of votes should be the only currency allowed.
As far as worker ownership of companies, I actually think a great deal of the corruption in politics could be alleviated by this system. When a company is run by the workers, not only does the company care about its own self interests, but it also cares about the workers, the worker's family, the place where workers, the worker's future and their family's future. I believe the would result in much longer term thinking, more concern for the world we live in and the effects the company has on its communities.
Anyway, my 2 cents. Thanks for your reply.😀
Research "co-operative businesses" in the US and elsewhere. They exist and thrive.
Unions are helpful, but have you noticed how difficult it is to get a union approved and working? Companies fight tooth and nail against unions. We need to go beyond that - to worker controlled companies.
@@CarmenEspinosa-d3x I can't agree with you more. Unions are great, but they are nothing compared to employee controlled companies.
saying "use Ai to help you out" is like saying "use books to help you out" or "use science to help you out" it is too broad...
I don't support big tech and smh every time AI experts point to global poverty being on the decline, mention UBI or talk about ethics. The last thing i need is profit driven mega corporations and their LLMs dictating to me what is ethical to discuss.
Once they make you redundant and pay you UBI guess what you will say?
@@johngee777 i embrace the 4th ind rev and am making sure that i dont become redundant but try me
You're watching TH-cam, though... I don't think they make alphabet much cash
@@kayakMike1000 guilty a charged. even though I use adblocker, i am ultimately feeding GOOG a great deal of data but I think it's a fair trade of to support good creators.
@@johngee777 I'm sure that what I will observe is an increase in depravity and decline of civilization as happened with the Roman empire.
Not sure why nobody mentions this, but I think there's an important nuance to this conversation that is almost always overlooked these day: There is a HUGE difference between Generative AI (what we see currently flooding the market) and AGI (Artificial General Intelligence).
My two sense is that these billionaires who were previously worried about human safety due to the evolution of AI were actually worried about the evolution of AGI. But AGI is such a pipe dream (at least considering the current state of tech) that they've shifted their focus to the more popular, and marketable, Generative AI which poses no threat to anyone besides those doing relatively straightforwards tasks.
It's not a "This person is a liar and doesn't care if humanity dies" argument; It's more likely that the "AI" that everyone is _currently_ talking about is literally just a bunch of machine learning models propped up behind some smoke and mirrors and is NOWHERE NEAR capable of any sort of real, sentient intelligence (which is where the risk to humanity actually resides).
I really hope you're right. But I have a sinking feeling you're really wrong.
You are behind on the tech today. Research neurohacking. It’s here and has been for a long time.
I agree completely with you on this. The current AI is not really AI as such, more machine learning, marketing hype, and relatively trivial. When someone develops an AGI, or singularity, then the last person to leave might as well switch off the lights.
Agree. The talk about 'danger to humanity' is hype, and the purpose of the 'talk'.
yeah our current AI is nothing more than a toy. There is "consciousness" or "thinking" thread whatsoever. They are really quite simple when you delve into them. A rat's brain is a billion times more complex than any AI we have right now.
These AI optimists seem to think that by magically pushing in more random data into these things will somehow give us AGI. But how? the things don't think at all. This is just another AI hype cycle just like in the 1950's when they could automatically translate 1 English wod into 1 Russian word, they then thought by putting in all the other words in the dictionary in 3 years they'd have AI that can magically autotranslate every language. Completely neglecting grammar, nuance and all that.
What we'll get in the next 5 years is they'll spent billions on more training, squeeze out some slightly better results, maybe implement some of this stuff into some business software (enabling them to lay off more low level workers) but they'll ultimately hit a roof and have nowhere else to go until some new method is invented.
I hope I'm wrong and they can come up with some "consciousness" thread that truly allows an AI to work on itself (and other things) intelligently but I've seen no evidence of that so far.
Wake me up when they show me a robot that passes the "make a cup of coffee in a random person's house" test.
“The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.”
― William Shakespeare, As You Like It
If only Kevin Spacey had heeded that one.
Wisdom is a dangerous lover because her indentical twin is always out to get you.
And the rest are just a bunch of suckers easier to be fooled than convincing them they're being fooled! th-cam.com/video/iQcv8ht5DoY/w-d-xo.html
@@nathanpetrich7309 where is that quote from? I like it
Also the identical twin is out to get you!
I think the facial expression and tone of these tech leaders speaking says it all. They are not smiling, they don't sound excited, there's no genuine joy.
You have a well developed intuition for what is in the interest of humanity as a whole and what is deceptive talk from people who are so poor that the only thing they've got... Is money.
“A trap is only a trap if you don't know about it. If you know about it, it's a challenge.”
― China Miéville, King Rat
Mmmmkay.
Next.
I like it
How quaint. Tell that to the billions who have no clue what is about to hit them.
A trap assumes you can’t go around, whatever the cause. That you will end up there. Still trap.
Yeah, I question anyone that thinks posting some quote does absolutely anything to advance a discussion or a person's thinking on the matter.
I think AI is in a giant hype cycle and people are going to be disappointed in the world that it creates.
I think like the Crypto craze a few years back, but seems to have slow down.
But then it’s not a hype if it changes the world ?
I very much like it already.
If need Feedback, I call the AI.
Trying to code, get help with the AI.
Do some language task, asking the AI.
Sometimes I go on a walk and have a conversation about a topic of interest.
When I am studying, I can ask questions to the AI.
Yes the future might be a bit scary, but currently it is very valuable.
Still, it cannot be denied that with every technological improvement lives have gotten better over the centuries. AI is another that should do the same. Ideally, in time, perhaps something like a true utopia can be achieved.
It's not hype but people are faking it to get ahead and create hype to get investors. Happens with all new technology. It's about money. AI is going to be super useful. The bad thing is that the people with the most money will be able to do the most and have the most control. As long as people continue to share how they make things and have it open source though we can try and use these same tools
AI is good if you use it for the benefits of others because it can help our work faster. But if it use for the interest of the owner of these AI Companies then it is really scary.
One of the reasons the Luddites opposed the machines textile manufacturers were rolling out was that it was incredibly efficient at quickly producing piles of low quality cloth.
I predict AI is going to, at best, leave us with reams of dogshit copy conjured up by utterly mediocre office potatoes.
AI is the modern iteration of the belief in the 'Computer' and before that the 'Robot' con. There is no intelligence, but the illusion of intelligence. It reflects the narrow limited understanding of humans and life. Unfortunately it will impact life, but with the current elite, not in a positive way. The 'Futuists' of the '30's imagined the wonders of technology would lead to a work load of 4 hrs pr. week ... that was before computers entered the scene ... look at where we are, in a time squeeze.
Well said. One of the best AI videos out there. Truthful and on point.sam Altman gives me creeps. Keep it coming ❤
Thinking government regulation will fix anything is foolish.
100% man… people dont get it😂
The EU regulation has some potential
Government regulations are the best way to ensure your monopoly, and have been since the 19th century.
ok what's the alternative then
It's hilarious to see you got Hubspot to sponsor your "AI is a lie" video so that they can market "AI for GTM" bundle 😂. Well played 👏👏👏
a report by Gartner predicts that up to 20% of companies might lay off employees in the next 12-18 months due to economic uncertainty
AI is definitely part of that too.
"economic uncertainty"
"uh oh, free money isn't coming back soon"
this sounds like the dumbest statement ever, go over what you just said again
@@Vincent-qd8lj why so much hatred?
"AI will not steal your job; A person using AI will."
... Which job loss gives you a narrow time window (before poverty kills) in which to regroup, grow your AI skills, and come back to steal their job in turn. Don't we all love having cutthroat individualism as our prime societal ethic.
You saw that comment last week somewhere and repeat it here
I implement AI, so yes that's how it works.
AI in general is not a tool to 'take jobs', it's a tool to automate processes. A tool like any other I've been implementing for years to remove repetition. If your job involves largely repetition then yes, automation will catch up to you. Jobs that are 'somewhat repetitive' are the ones where people disbelieve and this comment applies. The 'hard parts' get moved to a person, the repetition is scripted(AI or whatever) and no longer forms part of the JD for the person. So, you need less people. Normally people are not fired
etrenched. They are repurposed and over time people leave... they are not rehired.
I have had a very pessimistic view for about a year now.
1. UBI will be the minimum that avoids mass starvation and mass homelessness
2. When 40% of white collar workers have been retrenched UBI is the only possible outcome.
3. Regulation is a pipedream.
UBI : just do the arithmetic. Take the US. You have to pay UBI to everyone to avoid administering it, which will be close to impossible. So 340M times (say) $2000 times 12 - ooooops. very big number. Absolutely cannot make that $10,000.
I think the collapse most likely starts within the next 3 or 4 years. I can see no reason for this not to happen.
UBI won't happen. For this, you would need to take away what brought us there in the first place (greed, power, control etc.) from humans. IMPOSSIBLE
UBI is just Marxism / Communism rebranded 😒 and will stagnate any culture that pushes it as there will be no incentive to do better or innovate * see Cuba
Who will finance UBI in a society where no one works ? AI don't pay any taxes. Taxes from Corporation and the Rich ? So Corporations replace workers with AI, then pay those workers UBI to sit idle at home. The incentive for doing this is that if everyone is broke, there will be no one to buy the products of the Corporations. Seems like some kind of absurd zero sum game.
And the fact that Inflation from the UBI will be life crushing.
Hi Tina, what's the name of the Anime in your intro?
🐈⬛
Open source community is crucial and doing its job in AI like it has done in previous eras of tech.
Open source will democratize AI and prevent super centralization.
It's powerful how Tina explains the difference between corporate and open source so there is a frame of revenue to understand why open source is so important.
Very smart strategy. A video catering to the anti AI crowd with an AI sponsorship so you can cater to both audiences. Well Played.
Lol😂
more like hypocritical lol
Hmm I’m not anti AI though? I’m all for AI being used correctly. Also it’s happening whether we like it or not so better choice to learn and adapt. I just needed to point this out about big tech AI companies
@@TinaHuang1 Fair.
What topic can I make up to make money
While making money from a completely made-up topic can be tricky, there are definitely ways to leverage your creativity and come up with a niche topic that has earning potential. Here are some approaches:
Combine existing interests: Do you have hobbies you're passionate about? Think about ways to merge them. For example, if you love video games and fitness, you could create a channel on "Gamified Fitness" with workouts inspired by popular games.
Target emerging trends: Stay updated on current events and social media trends. Is there a new technology or social movement gaining traction? You could position yourself as an expert on a sub-topic within that trend.
Solve specific problems: Are there small, everyday challenges people face? Brainstorm solutions and build content around them. For instance, "Tiny Apartment Organization Hacks" could be a great niche for a blog or TH-cam channel.
Target a specific audience: Instead of creating generic content, focus on a particular demographic. This could be parents of toddlers, entrepreneurs over 50, or gamers who love indie games. Understanding their needs allows you to tailor your content and potentially offer solutions they'll pay for.
Remember, the key is to find a niche that balances creativity, problem-solving, and audience interest. Don't be afraid to experiment and see what resonates!
You criticize AI, yet the video starts with a ad section that explicitly advertises how to leverage the suddenly super useful power of AI to positively impact your own career 😅
All of these tech TH-camrs are the same, they don't believe the doomsday crap they're selling, it's all just clickbait.
It's basically an ad channel with some commentary sprinkled around.
Nothing wrong with AI but she is right though
No confirmation of anything in AI is credible. Reporters enjoy the Magic Turk.
Someone didn’t watch the video before commenting
The limitations in language is causing trouble for AI learning... Like if you stop AI from saying certain politically incorrect things ... You also stop the AI from from going down that branch and learn something useful ...
A few months ago, I amused myself by tying Gemini into knots. Unfortunately, it did not learn from its mistakes. Which I would think is the whole point of AI.
It was very nostalgic for me, reminding me of the fun days in the 1980s I spent tying Eliza into knots.
what you mean "tying into knots"? You trained the thing to make knots?
LLM context windows are getting much bigger, and different kinds of more persistent memory are being implemented. I don't get why people assume that the truly astonishing progress we've seen over the last few years would come to a staggering halt at whatever moment they make that claim.
the reality is OpenAI is literally built on open source technology. Without open source contributors and projects, GPT literally wouldn't exist. I'm bias and contribute to apache.
To me it looks like is started as OpenAI and turned to ClosedAI to reap the benefits of all the Open stuff. Like Apache going to wall street.
That goes for every single large tech company.
It's spelled biased. It's like saying "I'm anger" instead of "I'm angry".
My litmus test for AI has been prompting it to make a unique and competitive Magic the Gathering deck for the Modern Format for me. To date, I've been really underwhelmed. For starters, the knowledge base in the chat tools I've used has been really old. They don't know about new MTG cards that have come out in like the past five years. I have yet to have a "wow!" moment. Magic the Gathering is one of the most complex games in the known world, so it stands to reason, that this is a decent way to test out the technology.
That’s actually a great idea
Have you tried fancier methods like RAG or fine-tuning to see if it can improve your results? The test is interesting but expecting an AI model to innovate, on a niche domain like MTG, from memory is not realistic.
This video is so on point! Btw, the first "chess automaton" was done in the 1700s and had a human chess player inside. Tech is never going to create this utopia, the promises of inventions of in past like steam engines, nuclear power, smart phones, crypto currency, social media all were very different from the actual reality. Why should this be any different? This is not about improving humanity, it's about a few wanting to become insanely rich.
Chess computers now are undefeatable by humans.
@@ethancarter2664 Yes, but my point is how even back in the day humans have been used in faking "AI".
@@ethancarter2664 Wouldn't count on it. The numbers of moves are infinite, and the last human has not been born.
@@iRelevant.47.system.boycott You don't have to count on it, you could educated yourself on the subject BEFORE having an opinion.
The issue with open source in LLMs is that in the past you could just run most opensource software on a toaster.
You could use postgresql on a raspberry pi, launch nginx or apache phpmyadmin on anything and you could just buy a cheap server by any private provider.
Now two things are at play which are huge. First there is the cloud which is pretty restrictive and means that even if you use open source models, google, amazon, microsoft or other big tech companies are going to charge you for the compute (which is the most expensive part nowadays)
The second thing is that most of those models are huge, even a 7b model is not realistically runnable on a computer without beefy GPUs, everybody is using A100s or H100s (except maybe aws which uses more smaller GPUs), so even with the open source movement, compute is going to limit that and mean that all that work done by opensource teams which does not benifit them will benefit a lot to big tech companies.
And as small projects know that using GPUs as a service for inference is crazy expensive (something like 4000$ for 10 days of mixtral 8x7B) people will use services like bedrock which are cheaper for them but are also more advantageous for big tech companies
So in the end, the opensource community is just filling big tech's cup even more. We're doomed unless someone finds out quantisation which makes it viable to run on CPUs without waiting 1 hour between answers.
Also there is a GPU shortage meaning that even though a company would want to start a new inference service they would struggle to get the compute.
AI is amazing - it would be such a shame if only big companies controlled all of it. great video ❤
Get Ollama and then let it grab the LLM's for you to test on your computer locally. I can do it even on a Raspberry Pi5. Once you can run Agents locally then things get interesting and usable locally.
This is what will happen. Only big companies have the money and resources to train AI to do human level tasks. Like, drive a car. Deliver goods and services. Provide transport. Etc
You never answered, how they are lying?
AI is humanity changing.
Altman put a light on AI the industry like no one else.
I wonder why your entire TH-cam channel for the past year has been around AI.
Because she 'has a feeling.'
Exactly. TH-camrs producing content of value is the actual lie.
The lie is that lizard people like Sam Altman care about the good of humanity.
did you WATCH the video????
@@LovingSoul61
I did watch the entire video, and here are the key points I took away from it:
The host started by saying she has a "feeling" that big tech is lying about AI, which is a weak premise to begin with. She then makes a sweeping generalization about mid to high level business executives not using AI in a valuable way, without providing concrete evidence.
Next, she claims companies are overhyping their AI products just to get VC funding. While this may happen in some cases, she paints the entire industry with a broad brush.
The video then shows clips of tech leaders stating AI is humanity-changing. I don't see the lie here. AI will monumentally change humanity and impact everyone now and in the future. Acknowledging the transformative potential of AI is not an exaggeration.
She also boasts about the open source AI community, which seems out of place in a video claiming big tech is lying.
Throughout the video, the host relies heavily on dramatization and storytelling rather than presenting a well-reasoned, fact-based argument.
Ultimately, this video fails to coherently support its central claim that big tech is lying about AI. It comes across more as a promotion for HubSpot than a serious critique of the industry.
So in summary, I did watch the full video, and I found its arguments to be weak, inconsistent, and lacking in substance. The host makes bold claims without proper evidence and relies on vague feelings rather than facts.
Sources
Myself
Altman comes across as a psychopath. Not sure he is, but the vibe is there.
10000%
Are self-driving cars safe?
There is a general perception amongst the leaders in AI and I must say that perception is a male driven vehicle of profit making modes. There is something about the female perception when not driven by a male story that sees you the illusion of progress. Men when confronted with this fight exceptionally confronting. To make money out of making money is not the process of AI to live a better life yes, but not to have because you cannot cook a robot to clean up for you and Cook for you we are useless except to solve a problem which doesn't really exist. The problem is the lack of work to feed our soul not to solve a problem to get a solution in the future. This is a male futility occupying themselves with activity complex activity but a distraction nevertheless. There are serious questions to be answered which is mainly what is life and where we going with it.
At its current level, AI is more of a buzzword that generates a lot of popularity and encourages a lot of VC funding. I don't speak from a place of authority nor do I have a ton of experience, but I feel like its the next big hype train maybe similar to how crypto was a couple of years back?
Do I see AI becoming a tool that can advance humanity? Definitely! But the tools need to become more advanced and capable of many functions.
Thanks for posting this. I have also tried to replicate results from some of these companies and been unable. I didn't have time to look into it further... just figured it was me.
Modern AI is pretty cool. There's a lot of cool, useful things that can be done with it. The problem is most of these companies producing seemingly impressive demonstrations aren't actually doing any kind of foundational improvement on the technology. They're just throwing more compute power at the problem. Almost all the "progress" being demonstrated is just dumping more and more and more processing power at the training and model. It's not sustainable, and I don't just mean that in an environmental sense. This is the reason Sam Altman was asking for such ridiculous amounts of investment earlier this year--it's not going into "research". It's going into pushing more GPUs into the compute clusters.
EDIT: A bit concerning that you think government is the answer, though. The government are the ones who created the policies and incentives that allowed this insane grift to happen in the first place.
Ai is like that one student that you thought was going to go really far after high school. Then you find out they got a girl preg does drugs and works at the local gas station.
true xd
5:35 Work on Grok didn't start until after no one paid attention to slowdown request.
UBI would need to be international rather than U.S. based to adequately compensate global layoffs due to AI. How likely is that?
If UBI will work in the US then other countries will consider to adopt it, even authoritarian ones but maybe except the most harsh and poor ones like North Korea, DRK, Somalia ecc.
@@greenlime8726If US is against free healthcare. Which is pretty important. What makes you think they'll start giving everyone free money, in perpetuity?
@@alexanderrahl482 Actually nothing, I don't think it will be ever introduced. Introduction of UBI would be harder than abolishing electoral college or passing to a proportional system.
As a programmer, I can tell you that AI is mostly just smoke and mirrors.
Proof?
Beeing a programmer doesn't give you any knowledge about ai. I'm a programmer myself and a lot of my Colleges don't know amything about ai. And if you ever used ai to program you know it's not just smoke
@@kecksbelit3300 You do realize that AI algorithms are written by programmers, don't you? Yes, AI programs (like any other program) can produce results (not very good results, generally speaking), but they operate on algorithms that merely mimic or create the illusion of intelligence. It's similar to how, watching a puppet show, you begin to believe the puppets are actually alive and invested with life; but it's all just an illusion. They are blocks of wood on strings. In the same way, there is nothing intelligent about AI; it's all mimicry. Computers can be used to analyze data and make predictions (which, incidentally, are often entirely wrong due to missing parameters, bad modelling, and gaps in the programmer's understanding of the thing he is trying to model) and that can sometimes be a very useful tool, but calling it Artificial Intelligence is misleading and pretentious. It doesn't have one iota of intelligence.
Super cool that you're a programmer! What field are you in and have you noticed any encroachment from AI? Just curious!
which anime is playing at 1:05? Looked pretty cool.
seems to be named "Dear Alice 2D" after google image research
Yeah it is visually awesome
It's a yogurt commercial. Check out the 'Dear Alice Decommodified Edition' for an ad-free experience
@@ld.2608 did you use tineye or lens or did you use an LLM? Just curious
@@ld.2608 nvm, I am sure it was tineye or lens, if you used image search.
@@nicolaspace1182 Directly google image search :)
But I think tineye is quite the same
RIGHT! it's only statistical analysis of text-not intelligent at all.
BOOM - it nailed you , lol this fake video tricked you into making a comment
Yes, it remains to be seen who really stands to benefit from emerging AI tech. I think we can assume it won’t be for the wellbeing and wealth of the vast majority of humanity. If anything it will likely increase the gap between the haves and the have nots. But, we’ll see…
The people in India worked on tasks related to supporting the accuracy of Just Walk Out technology, but it wasn't exactly "viewing your purchases" live. Here's a breakdown of their role:
Training the AI: They likely reviewed video snippets to help train the machine learning algorithms that power Just Walk Out. This could involve labelling items in videos to teach the AI how to identify products correctly.
Verifying Inaccurate Scans: In some cases, the automated system might not perfectly track what a customer picks up or puts down. These reviewers would likely analyze short video clips of those situations to ensure the customer's bill reflects what they actually bought.
It's important to understand that they weren't directly monitoring every customer's shopping trip. Their role was more behind-the-scenes, focused on improving the technology's accuracy.
Here's a different way to think about it: Imagine you're training a self-driving car. You might show it videos of streets and sidewalks to help it recognize objects like cars and pedestrians. That's similar to what the reviewers in India were doing for Just Walk Out.
Thanks for the positive spin, but this is likely the new job after the one replaced by 'AI'. I think I'd prefer sit in the cash register, chit chating with the customers.
I love how Amazon got called out and some circles started calling AI "Actually Indians". As an online worker, a lot of my income comes from training AI. It's nowhere near groundbreaking technology yet. But it's definitely going to be useful in the future. Over hyped as heck. But my investments are happy.
Hi Tina. Thank you!
Hi I'm Ritesh and this year in 2024 I'm going to college for my Btech degree in artificial intelligence and data science course. What laptop should I buy for heavy machine learning tasks and others things related to my field as well as for competitive programming, video editing as in davinci resolve, etc... But mainly I want a professional laptop for me. I'm even willing to wait for the new M4 MacBook Pro or the new arm based windows that are coming this year for the best professional laptop for my field that I will be using for the next 7-8 years and at least 5-6 years. What should I buy? Can you suggest?
Thanking in advance.
I work in big tech, you're right, it's not about making life better for humans. It's about replacing expensive tech workers and concentrating wealth in the C-level, SVP, and VP class. Even directors are treated like peasants now. But the reality is that "a technology once invented cannot be uninvented", so the best we can do is be the ones that make AI a reality. Knowledge workers that work only on a computer should be the most scared -- lawyers, radiologist doctors, telemedicine doctors, software engineers, customer support agents, etc. More people will get access to these services, but really the productivity gains will be usurped by the execs. As for this utopian UBI world -- it's going to be like the matrix, they'll give out just enough money to keep you alive spinning the energy-generating hamster wheel. It won't be like Wall-E and also wont' be completely dystopian either. Altman is actually the biggest snake, remember he tried to harvest biometric data from poor countries by handing out BS cryptocurrencies.
I will be 💯 honest as an AI optimist I was a little pessimistic in the beginning of the video. But glad I watched the whole thing. Quality video and a great nuanced approach. You gained a new sub.
My reaction exactly.
I consider the AI phenomena a con, but enjoyed the video.
Last week they said on CNN that AI is going to solve homelessness 😂
By putting the final nail in the coffin to the homeless :s
It eventually will. Improvements in manufacturing will lead to cheaper materials for construction, which will lead to cheaper houses. Main issue really is zoning laws. If more high rises are built then property prices will drop.
Homelessness is much more complicated though. Mental health issues are usually involved so modernized Sanitariums would be a good idea.
Yes, if everyone is homeless then nobody is
@@tesserae-c2y don't be fooled. materials have gone way down already. just like underlying food commodities and the cost of producing electricity all having dropped by around 70% yet prices remain sky high. the issue is all our basic human needs are being exploited to maximize profits by colluding mega corps and congress. just have a look at their portfolios.
The unintended consequences like we saw with social media?
Social media didn't (completely) replace people, though. I'd say this is magnitudes more disruptive.
@@juanmacias5922 What it did do though was change the dynamics of how things are bought and sold but crucially how we're being pushed into buying stuff. We use services like Facebook which are for-all-intents-and-purposes "free at the point of use" but at the cost of being combarded with adverts/commercials, AND we're basically being spied on. I sometimes wish FB was just a paid service; No one wants to art with their money if they don't need to but I'd rather that than big brother.
Remove the "unintended" part.
@@juanmacias5922 we are also years away from it replacing people...I work in big tech...trust me lol
Young girl suicide rates spiked since Instagram came online.
Ai is just a scam by companies to raise capital and hope something turns up the crash should be epic.
I've realized the gap between richest and poorest keeps getting bigger but, that microphone you're sitting in front of, 40 years ago would have cost you $10,000. Insanely expensive prototypes that lead to cheap mass produced versions do work.
OpenAI went for profit because it realised GPT would need millions of GPUs. There was no way a not for profit could fund that.
It took them how many years to realize that ?
The only environment they building is a monthly fee not owning what you are buying, getting banned environment where you constantly need to pay for stuff in a biweekly cycle!
So is it fake or is it dangerous? You’re arguing both but it can’t be that dangerous if it’s just people in the background like it’s always been anyway.
Perhaps a bit of both? I feel like its a massive buzzword that just generates a ton of interest in its current state and a lot of VC funding. We'll see if it remains fake or dangerous.
At the moment, it's neither, this person is purely speculating with no real tangible proof. As someone who works for one of the companies mentioned in this, I can assure you that it's real, but it's a long ways off from replacing everyone and resulting in the need for UBI or human destruction...
it could be both at the same time
@@awwwwhhhyeahhhh sir/mam are you speaking the absolute truth?
@@ackerwoman16 depends on your definition of "long way off", but yes.
I like the punchline of this video - pro regulation. Yet that's what big tech companies want - to regulate it, so that startups would die in infancy. She either doesn't understand that, or... Well, she was working for Meta, right? And Meta is not at all evil.
1:07 what cartoon/animation?
And after all her BS she is in the end, she is earning money as an agent in AI courses.
She probably gets a lot of money for those ads...
anyways, I think your argument is a bit confused here.. is it that AI doesn't work, that it is a scam just to get money? I personally know that that isn't true - it makes me at least an order of magnitude more productive, and millions of people using it can't really be that wrong. is your argument that the AI VCs are being disingenuous when they say it could be a massive leap forward or the biggest disaster in human history? It's hard to square that considering - at least in the interviews I've seen - they've given equal time to either outcome. Is your argument that they are scamming investors out of money? The reason that people have been pouring investment into AI is not because of where AI is now, but because they see the possibility of where AI WILL BE.
You also neglect advancements of AI that are truly breathtaking - LLMs are spectactular in themselves, but advances in chip design and manufacture, network infrastructure, manufacture all due to AI, and AI driven science are just as impressive. DeepMind beat go in 2016 - an awe inspiring task in itself - but AlphaFold is a true revolution. Before AlphaFold It took one PHD to turn a sequenced protein into its 3 dimensional representation. AlphaFold basically sped up that process a billionfold. Now, pretty much every protein we know of has a 3D shape. And they have done the same with materials science, and will go on to most likely do the same thing with drug discovery.
I get the pit in the stomach feeling here - when the odds of extinction are anywhere between 0% and 90% depending on who you talk to, but one thing you can't say of AI is that it is a lie.
Bahahahaaa!
Video against AI.
Sponsored by “Company for AI”.
LAUGHABLE.
"Big Tech AI Is A Lie" unless they sponsor me 🤷♂
Thought it was pretty clever ...
How is it betterment for humanity when AI replace job and people need to live on UBI? Open source AI or not. Most of the population will need to get handout from a government that is losing public trust lately? How is that good for democracy ? What if the government suddenly decided to stop giving handouts?
With the working population on UBI, where is the tax revenue for the UBI gonna come from ? The Rich !
Amazing research for this video. Great content!
If it's a trap, how come I can download LLM (quantize version) like llama 3 onto my laptop and chat with it like a human to human?
Because you are just chatting with statistical models of human language behavior.
'Lisa' was an instant hit back in the day ... like 50 years ago ... one of the first successful computer programs for the general public.
@@carultch Creating the illusion of a dialogue and 'someone' there.
Tina stop blackpilling us. Our little hearts can't take it
The reason these guys are feeding us the catastrophic "AI risk" scenarios is that when we discuss if this thing is gonna rise up and kill us all, we don't discuss, if it's actually useful. And if it isn't actually a little crap.
Openai just published regulation. They want to track GPUs. They want controlled weights and AI. Openai is the most dangerous factor right now. I am still sure that the whole Sam Altman incident was not for nothing and is downplayed too much.
With the broken theory of trickle down economics, the Panama papers exposed a ton of wealthy hide their holdings in offshore low tax or no tax nations. A great example in the tech sector is Ireland, which has basically given huge tax breaks to wealthy multinational corporations, so you will find all the big names there, Google, Meta etc. I don't know if people know this, but capitalism failed many centuries ago. Today, 38% of the US economy is run by federal government jobs and once you account for contract labor, the government of the USA employs 68% to 71% of the country, depending on some semantics about what qualifies, with some people arguing certain service jobs only exist because of this spending etc, as economics is muddy water. The entire point of AI is these people want to replace you, simple as that, they know we can't keep going the way we are and they think they can run machine versions of you for less energy and take more of the planet for themselves. Money is broken and has been for 5,000 years and the fact we can't grow up and accept that stuff is broken will be our own undoing.
No, we don't need more policies and regulations
We need 99.9999% less regulations.
what a dumb take
20+ year web development vet here. This was brilliant. Well done!
The hype is incredible. The investment is astronomical. To live up to this hype and produce stable results would be very hard. I just do not see what in llm tech can actually produce intelligence that can be trusted to be accurate. A search engine with nicer presentation, yes. Likely a very inefficient and slow one… But if something is only 80% correct, and you do not know which 20% is wrong, don’t you have to reevaluate the whole thing manually?
Can yo add your reference yt video link as nowadays the yt is not showing those link while you are mentioning them
The "cost of labor" is humans working. If no humans are working they will have Zero income which means $0 to spend on goods or services. This means that the wealthy who control the means of production will be unable to Sell the goods and services they're producing for almost nothing. This would break the economy. Idk is that's what Sam Altman is explicitly referring to, but that's been my view of what's going to happen. We have to put enough pressure to force a socioeconomic paradigm that no longer relies on human labor to enable human survival. I personally have believed that AI taking over human labor will force this change by virtue of breaking the economy, with only three real possible outcomes - The proletariat will either have to fend for ourselves and make an economic system of our own while the wealthy circle jerk themselves into oblivion, or we'll have to force a full shift to a more human well being focused socioeconomic system, Oooorrrr, we all ignore everything and wipe ourselves out. So I guess what I'm saying is, I agree we need to be active in our role in pushing the winds of this change towards a more human friendly paradigm, but also I think regardless, there's no way our current socioeconomic paradigm comes through the AI revolution unchanged, and that as long as we ARE taking an active role in ensuring it goes the right direction, there's real hope for a better future at the end of it.
So you got a bad feeling but then throw in an ad for a.I? That’s kinda weurd
"Big Tech AI Is A Lie" unless they sponsor my video 🤷♂
This video should be called. How to criticize OpenAI, Microsoft, and Google and defend Meta ("OpenSource") without looking like it.
It's all salemen telling you how great their product is to convince you to buy. I do not understand how people can still trust them after all these years.
3:20 "Not too much."
People, read and remember this, because market economy worked, works and will work like this forever:
"Capital eschews no profit, or very small profit, just as Nature was formerly said to abhor a vacuum. With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 per cent. will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 per cent. certain will produce eagerness; 50 per cent., positive audacity; 100 per cent. will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 per cent., and there is not a crime at which it will scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged. If turbulence and strife will bring a profit, it will freely encourage both. Smuggling and the slave-trade have amply proved all that is here stated." - Thomas Joseph Dunning.
P.S. These words were even quoted by Karl Marx in his famous great work "Capital".