I never understoon why everyone needs to adhere to "morning people"'s schedule. Who says school needs to start at 8? Or office?

Why can't it start at 10 AM? I'm sure "morning people" can find something useful to do in the free wee hours, just like us "not morning people" are expected to find something useful for the late hours.

Problem solved, everyone happy.

How is somene 1,500 miles away going to help you when your car has broken down?

The benefit of AM over everything that is that it works at a very large distance. Very handy when you try to shelter in place after a nuclear strike, or after a hurricane has devastated your state and the one next to it, and you want to stay up to date; not so handy when you need a tow and don't want to wait for a week in yohr cat for it to arrive. (Besides, car AM raduos are receive only.)

Really? How that?

I always thought they were actually the only ones getting it right There isn't any other truly secure way of getting E2E right except for having the users comoare pubkeys. Element is the only one to do that, and I'm impressed how elegantly they did it.

Everyone else just has some crappy heuristics or "phone key" or "shared number" or whatever which at least at one point in the past got hacked.

Don't subsidize shit.

Subsudies are money paid by the state to the producer. The state has its money essentially from middle-class taxes, while "producers" is just a code word for upper-class investors. So subsidies are esentially just abother way of redistributing wealth from bottom to top.

Instead, pay people enough that subsudies aren't necessary. That's wealth distribution from top to bottom, as it should be for a more uniform result.

Science woudn't pay for it.

Engineering might, once th AI gets its shit straight.

But the mass market is where the cheese is, when you're as big as Google.

If I help you get rid of the gun you shot someone with, technically I didn't commit the murder. I'm still on the hook for it though.

This isn't that different: it's the state that violates constitutional rights. Flock helps with that. They should be treated like the guy helping getting rid of the murder weapon.

Then there's also the penal code.

If any of the idiots programs an "internet worm" which spreads uncontrollably and causes damage, we already have legislation in place to jail them. "Your honorI didn't intend to do damage" doesn't save you these days. (It might've been different in the 1980s, but not anymore.)

So jail whoever fails to control their AI, using the very same laws.

But the problem here ia that it's about money - a *lot* of money - and there is every incentive to lie, deceive, and perform "creative marketing". So we're being held for fools, and everyone is buying into an obvious lie as a marketing strategy. "We can't conteol it" my ass.

Nobody asked the car to kill pedestrians. I just put a brick on the gas pedal.

You're being sarcastic, but you're more right than you think. Either way we don't "need to worry", we need to do something about it.

But the thing is: specifically *what* we should do depends a lot on where the threat ia coming from - the AI, or the guy.

But that's not the AI killing us, it's the idiot who put the AI in charge. Kind of like putting a brick in the gas pedal of a car abd letting it loose in the pedestrian precinct.

And at any rate, it doesn't need 'better" AI to do that. ChatGPT 2 or 3 are already perfectly capable of fucking up at that level. All you need ia someone to build them a paperclip factory.

Ban paperclips. /s

Sweet summer child yourself.

"not university" != "private sector"

The limits of your own horizon isn't where the world ends, dude. Just because you don't understand the concepts like free will and initial decisi doesn't mean they don't exist.

I don't care whether you "do ChatGPT" or not. You're a prick so the discussion's over as far as I'm concerned.

Drive isn't the same thing as an initial impulse. (It was supposed to be "initial" not "infernal" - autocorrect at work.)

AI doesn't just "decide" to break out.

One thing it's lacking is internal motivation, the initial impulse to do stuff. It needs to be told to do something it doesn't "want" on its own.

Wrong.

One thing humans have and AI doesn't (and it's not even close to having) is an infernal impulse for action - one that's truly bot rooted in some kind of programming or instruction or prompt.