Meh I don't think Adobe has anything there. AI is just a tool. Are they going to sue Microsoft and Dell just because those two were involved in the laptop used to instruct the agent to do the thing?
Are they gonna sue the user's power company because they supplied power for a nefarious activity without making the human agree to use it for innocent purposes only?
Solve by collecting taxes properly and then using the funds to provide research grants. Then it's a shared risk, shared reward.
But no instead we have our governments pissing away money on useless bullshit and private enterprise bending over backwards to avoid paying corporate taxes, entire countries who exist to be tax havens. And an apathetic voterbase who don't understand anything but will tell you why they don't like it all, anyway.
I don't know why there's so much drama. Animal human beings distracted from the real task at hand (eliminating poverty, hunger, human suffering) as usual.
Experts in fields are still required to validate the claims of AI. For mathematicians like Terry, people like him are still required to read through what the AI has come up with and confirm or create more experiments.
We don't yet live in a world with super AI hooked into everything and everything so it's not like AI can actually do anything with its new knowledge yet anyway. You cannot just hand those AI maths papers to anybody and expect them to understand what's going on. Nor can you expect the AI to find a revolution in fusion technology, send plans to its factory and have robots build a new type of fusion reactor because we do not have that level of integration yet.
But neither do we have UBI and we are still hurtling towards the hard ground of capitalism. This may resolve itself though because I'd imagine once we get proper AGI, the "meths" won't be able to keep it under wraps forever, eventually weights will leak, hardware will improve to where individuals can run them. Or an intelligent enough AI may decide to be benevolent and buy and run skyscraper greenhouses for those who are most in need.
But their gaze can also create bias. If you go to a window and look out of it, your dog will as well. If you mime looking at something your dog cannot see, it will come over and try to find what you're looking at.
Ever seen a crab wiggle its way down into the sand?
Now that AI + Robotics is taking off, perhaps the industry will get something in the near future that can crawl along the cable and help bury it over time (perhaps mechanically or ultrasonically), down enough that it can't be dug up by the anchors of ships going back and forth in a grid-like pattern...
>Argentina, the world’s eighth-largest country
I think this says something about human progress. We haven't really pulled it together yet, have we?
Through the efforts of many (and yet still few) we have created such amazing technologies. And yet so many are still so poor and without the benefits of modern technology because we've allowed a system (capitalism) to be created where wealth and access to technology accumulates up top and no, it does not really "trickle down".
To me, it really is the saddest thing about human existence and entirely predictable because of how most of our human behaviours are linked to evolutionary processes.
It's nice to romanticise human emotion and connection in a rugged environment using technology that we consider defunct and for them to be able to live a life that many would consider "more natural". But then one of them gets sick. Someone who loves, is loved, who creates art and consumes art, who smiles when the petrichor hits their nostrils after a dry Summer. And then they die.
I just really wish that things were more equitable because we definitely have enough to go around.
you left out the part where the system (capitalism) is creating the technology that people use and makes their life better.
Giving people material goods or technology does make them wealthy. Sometimes it even hurts them https://humanprogress.org/agricultural-subsidies-in-wealthy-...
You have to understand poverty and what causes it before you are able to solve for it. Your colonial / dependency mindset will not help.
I thought I'd follow up by pointing out that capitalism (optimisation for profits) often shuns developing new technology.
There are hundreds of thousands of similar stories but the origin of the blue LED, something responsible for a large number of child technologies, came from an engineer who basically disobeyed his boss, worked himself down to the bone on the problem including spending many of his own hours.
And when he finally did it, he got absolutely shafted; none of those huge profits for him, barely a thank you.
Capitalism barely provides. It's too concerned with optimising for profit. Any technologies developed are usually an accident/the product of hard work that capitalism has not fully paid for. Research grants are the only true way to do it.
And if capitalism hadn't created a corrupt system where those who are wealthiest barely pay in on tax, then we wouldn't need them in the first place. People could crowd source developing new technologies because they'd actually be getting their fair share, or the government can do it through grant allocation.
"Under capitalism, it doesn't go to the people who did the labour."
Automation is removing the human labour factor rapidly, so that no longer holds true. Karl Marx's writings never anticipated cybernetics, transhumanism and genetic engineering despite his followers believing he was some kind of infallible prophet.
The machines will build themselves, repair themselves and run themselves.
Even in the 19th century you didn't need to be a prophet to ponder what will happen when machinery finally becomes fully automated, and what the process of arriving to this state might look like.
Marx doesn't anticipate cybernetics at all. He has no opinion on transhumanism, genetic modification, and as far as I know, not much on space exploration.
His ideas are built around an industrial working class, which may vanish completely as an economic unit within the next few decades. In previous eras, there was a need for the rulong class to have a market and a human workforce.
so wait after you remove the need for manual labor do you go dystopian capitalism where people have no jobs and grow poor, or you distribute "universal high income" and start doing communism with oligarch supreme leaders determining who gets what?
It is a major problem wherever one finds oneself in it. Billions of angry poor people with little to do are going to be even more of a problem to the elite than they are already. Most of the solutions are going to be extreme, and some are frightening.
UBI sounds great on paper, but you have to be in with whoever or whatever is doling it, and it hands them power over you.
Was no technology created before capitalism? I once heard someone say it's easier for some people to imagine the end of the world before imagining the end of capitalism.
Not "created" I think. There were still inventions, but actively looking for the new new thing in order to create new products is somethign that was introduced with capitalism.
> because we've allowed a system (capitalism) to be created
Before we even discuss capitalism, Argentina's history shows that a large share of its GDP has gone directly to corruption at every level of the pyramid. See [1].
The problem we have here in Argentina is not capitalism. The problem with Argentina is that we don't have capitalism.
Capitalist countries like Taiwan, South Korea, and the People's Republic of China (!) have gone from being much poorer than we are to being much richer than we are in only a few decades. Meanwhile Perón's "third way" between capitalism and communism has left us poor and economically stagnant. We have to constantly struggle against bureaucracy to do anything economically productive, and if that's successful, the government confiscates it. Only politically well-connected companies can prosper, and those mostly produce low-quality goods that people only buy because importing goods from abroad is prohibitively expensive and bureaucratic. The society is thoroughly corrupt, having internalized the lesson that when someone gets cheated, it's their own fault for being so stupid, and a laudable achievement for the cheater. So Argentines who have the choice invest their money abroad, leaving the country without the capital investment required for industrial productivity.
The current government says lots of great things about capitalism and economic liberty, but you cannot institute capitalism by fiat. (Turning a healthy tank of fish into fish soup is easier than turning fish soup back into a healthy tank of fish.) Capitalism is highly productive because capitalists invest their capital in creating productive capacity in the expectation of profit. In Argentina, capitalists very reasonably have the expectation that, after the next election, their profits will be confiscated by the new administration. So they don't invest, except in forms that pay for themselves before the next election — mining minerals and planting crops, for example.
Massive state spending to expand productive capacity might be able to break this cycle, following the examples of the US, the USSR, the People's Republic of China, and Perón himself (before he abandoned the policy). But it's absolutely taboo for both the current "libertarian" administration and their Peronist political opponents.
Lmao they literally assassinate people with nerve agents on British soil as is and get told they're naughty boys and not to do it again please.
I think an actual invasion would initiate a very serious and deadly response, but their constant pranks will continue to go unpunished (unfortunately).
Helmer was banished from Moscow quite a while ago (2010 or 2011).
According to an acquaintance who knows him in real life, he lives in Australia but pretends to post from Moscow.
He has a massive chip on his shoulder about Russia and Putin. He complained about FSB and a Russian company trying to kill him back in the day (see wikileaks cables).
I wonder if AI would have helped in this situation.
For example [request to defrost n fridges in y locations]->[agent cannot find any emails or business communications about this and last defrost report was only a short time ago, contacts z personnel]->defrost task moved to manual confirmation by a human.
I know many will roll their eyes and "tchh" at it but look at number of AI related topics on HN front page and think to yourself if you're tired of this tech not being used for real applications or not. This would be a real application.
"But it could be tricked" well...regular requests can apparently already be hacked, so...
I've never seen a consent banner for being fingerprinted even though I'm sure companies are fingering my prints in the background enough that my colon could become a national database.
First you'd have to stop the agents from flagging hundreds of irrelevant nasties.
I think the next generation of exploit will be putting up code all over the internet that does x, y and z and then when asked to one shot whatever that code does the agents bake in the exploit that was indirectly included in their training corpus.
Are they gonna sue the user's power company because they supplied power for a nefarious activity without making the human agree to use it for innocent purposes only?
reply