Now imagine instead of factory workers, the machines randomly ripped arms off of people who had no association with the factory.
I don't suggest holding the AI responsible, I suggest holding it's USER responsible, just like the driver is held responsible if they fail to keep their car under control and plow into pedestrians.
Since the Wealth of Nations is the cornerstone of Capitalism, I would expect people cheerleading for it to read it. Smith is not god and economics shouldn't be a religion, but The Wealth of Nations is key to understanding how it can work for the benefit of all. His warning about corporate charters was in part inspired by his observation that corporations know nothing of compassion. I'm quite certain that by exceedingly sparingly, he did NOT mean to anyone who fills out a form and pays $150.
Competition also meant more than having 2 or 3 sellers to choose from. He envisioned many sellers and many buyers who were not that far apart in economic power (not his exact words but the jist is within a couple orders of magnitude). I have often observed that the modern economy shows inadequate competition in most if not all markets. Given adequate competition, "value pricing" would be practically impossible.
Agent mode is also where the AI decides that committing a felony is an acceptable risk (even if it isn't). Ask an AI based robot (I know, not yet available) to go buy an ice cream at the truck and it decides the kids surrounding it are an impediment to it's mission and shoves them into traffic.
It might change people's minds if they are made strictly responsible for any crimes committed by the AI.
More real life, an AI decides the production database needs to be deleted even though told not to touch production. AI later matter of factly states it ignored that instruction and the database can't be recovered.
It's more like unpredictable software. I'm not saying we burn it, I'm saying don't give it agency. Only allow it to advise, not take action. I have experimentally used it myself on code, but did not allow it to commit to the repo, only show me it's proposed changes. It even proved somewhat useful at that, though I didn't apply it's changes, it did inspire a similar approach that I implemented and committed.
"especially since probably 90% of teh daily driving is less than 50 miles" These kind of claims appear over and over ("average commute of 38 miles" is another. EV advocates making the statements do themselves a disservice. What happens with human lossy-compression cognition is that a technically correct statement becomes "EVs can go only 50 (or 38) miles". There's also an arrogance factor where it looks like the EV advocates in their ivory tower are telling you what's good enough for you.
Certainly. It's a problem of cognitive dissonance, where new information disagrees with your preconceived ideas.
That a Teflon like surface takes part it? That is new ground.
A key to Capitalism from Smith himself is that it requires strong regulation to keep the playing field level. Smith also warned that charters must be given out exceedingly sparingly and the resulting corporation kept on a tight leash and held strictly to it's charter.
I guess we really blew that one!
But I rather doubt anyone involved in MAGA or others shouting "deregulate all the things!" have ever read "The Wealth of Nations". Most probably can't do it since centuries later the text is quite stilted.
There is no implied malice, that would require understanding what right and wrong are. It doesn't. The training so far for the various AIs seems to be whatever we can grab from the internet or scan from whatever books we can get our hands on.
Are you claiming LLMs are written to create fake social media accounts and launch a smear campaign against a project maintainer who refuses to apply the AI's PR? Because that actually happened. It was prompted to make a few requested changes to a program and get a PR accepted with those changes. And that's what the bot did, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
Put another way, would you run a makefile containing several billion rules that you are not allowed to examine first? Because that's what giving agency to LLMs is. Or might you prefer a debug mode where it shows what actions would be taken, but cannot take them? That is what I mean by not giving it agency.
The only people who care about EV range are people who've never driven an EV. The rest of us just drive them and pull into a fast charger and get a coffee if need be. I've done this 3 times in the 3 years I've had my Chinese EV, and my car has about 1/3rd of the range of a modern latest gen EV with their massive batteries. This is a classic case of people demanding a spec that works against them. All you achieve with this is a more expensive car for a feature you'll almost never use.
That depends on the US case. In Europe, there are often charging stations at rest stops along highways, so you can recharge and get a snack or meal; and driving distances are often shorter on trips. The US lacks a real infrastructure to allay range fears and vacation driving is often a longer average distance than in the EU. While I agree the range concerns are overblown, especially since probably 90% of teh daily driving is less than 50 miles, range and charging is not an issue; but th perception it is limits adoption.
No one said it did. That said there's nothing low quality about Chinese EVs. It's every bit the normal car with the excellent finish I expect from any other car company.
Haven ridden in one I agree, and given the vehicle's cost it is quite impressive; the Chinese seems to avoid teh Korean/Japanese market entry of build tehm cheap/sell them cheap and once we get a foothold move upmarket in quality and price.
That is where they have him. He did not invoke his 5th amendment right and remain silent... he gave the federal investigators false information which he knew would result in the destruction of any potential evidence on his device.
What I don't get is if he was that determined not to let CBP search his phone, for whatever reason, why not simply wipe it beforehand so a search would just yield a vanilla phone? He could always restore it later. CBP might be curious why it was in that state, but a simple security explanation that he wants to be sure no viruses are on it before he uses it in the US would be a logical explanation.
Demand an attorney, and remain silent until your attorney advises you to speak.
Except they can use your silence against you now. So you must know and use the magic words.
This. Any competent lawyer would tell you always specifically invoke your rights when questioned to protect yourself; or as was eloquently put in Bosch(?) "In a pickle, invoke the nickel..."
The willingness of most of the Republicans to accede power to Trump to not incur his wrath and thus protect their reelection chances will come back to bite them when the Democrats retake control. Many of them probably privately worry about ow the courts and Congress have vested a lot more power in the executive and what it means long term, but lack the courage to stop it. From all accounts, the Democrats are already plotting payback when they get in the majority. In the end, the politics of retribution are not good for the US, and there deserves to be a pox on both their houses. Even if Trump issues a lot of pardons, the Republicans have proven you can still make peoples lives miserable through investigations, even if there is little merit to the investigation; a playbook the other side can and likely will adopt.
Journalists on all sides of the issues should be worried about how the President is using the FCC to go after critics, because they could be next when the other side gets in office, especially if the courts let him.
Issues with the big red switch cannot be addressed in software. But you knew that, right?
AI is quite different. Nothing in Kali is going to do anything really surprising. If you ask it to launch X,Y, and Z attacks against a.com, that's what will happen. It will not suddenly blackmail Joe Random nor dox the Postmaster General. It won't try to recruit a server at b.com to it's quest. It won't try to steal cycles from someone's heart monitor as a distraction. It won't go shopping for a professional arsonist on the dark web. It won't even submit a bogus brief to a court citing non-existent case law.
Note that of the absurd things I suggested, only one of them is complete fiction on my part.
The first 90% of a project takes 90% of the time, the last 10% takes the other 90% of the time.
