Der Stanford-Bericht verdeutlicht die wachsende Kluft zwischen KI-Insidern und allen anderen
Stanford report highlights growing disconnect between AI insiders and everyone else
Der Stanford-Bericht verdeutlicht die wachsende Kluft zwischen KI-Insidern und allen anderen
Stanford report highlights growing disconnect between AI insiders and everyone else
25 Kommentare
No shit, their thrones are built on this bubble not popping.
“Sure, it’s wildly expensive and uses an absurd amount of energy, but on the bright side, it’ll take your job and leave you homeless. Don’t worry, though, I’ll be obscenely wealthy!” – Sam Altman
The whole AI industry its greatly disconnected from the real world.
they are probably scared, and I understand why. They are making grand promises to take away everyone’s livelihood within the next few years (and making a lot of money doing it)
It’s almost as if it’s in their best interest to lie about every aspect of this industry.
[deleted]
I don’t think most people can comprehend that Claude code is not even 2 years old.
And this baby of a product just broke every revenue record possible with $30 billion ARR (growing exponentially).
And that they accidentally focused on R&D because they didn’t expect Claude code to be so good, they didn’t expect opus 4.6 to be as good, and they are surprised at how good their internal models are. …but ya, bubble etc.. the disconnect makes sense to me.
Edit: and even the haters admit they would rather use Claude’s other models than switch off.
My opinion is AI insiders are going to keep the grift going as long as they can. The rest of us see it as having already failed.
The New Yorker article about Altman paints him as a pathological liar, too.
AI can’t fail
I wish all the CEOs of AI companies long vacations on Sentinel Island
I’m still waiting on his promise of universal income. Chill with the agi, more with the universal income.
Sunk cost fallacy is hitting CEOs pretty hard now that their “brain child” is out there running amok.
There’re two ways to use AI. Use it to enhance people’s lives or for profit.
Because only the dipshits that want and will financially benefit from it are interacting with AI. The rest of us either turn it off, don’t ever interact with it, or get rid of things that force is using what is a flawed tool that doesn’t work well.
And I await the tech bro to tell me how wrong I am blah, blah, blah.
There is also disconnect between view on AI for people in US and Europe and people in Asia. in India, Japan, Korea, China AI are very much view as a positive trend
Okay, so maybe AI has already achieved sentience and all these Tech Bros are actually….androids in skin suits. Check to see if they have one corner cut off all their paperwork.
The insiders keep saying to us:
1. They are working to get everybody laid off and replaced with AI
2. They are stealing all creative outputs to make AI creative instead
3. Suck out all the electricity and water while returning basically zero jobs back to the communities they pillage
4. Make personal computers unattainably expensive
5. Borrow more and more money, setting the economy on a shaky path that smells bubbly.
6. They will demand a tax payer subsidized government bailout when they fail.
Besides this stuff maybe being a useful tool in medicine and science…Where are the wins?
[ Removed by Reddit ]
I hope an actually good open source AI that is easy to install and runs locally comes around and screws over the data center grift.
Most products the tech industry profits off of is absolutely useless and barely works. AI is the current pinnacle of this phenomenon. Sure it work but it’s almost useless. If you need a training program to use your product effectively and even after the training program it barely do much to help other than some basic stuff it’s not worth what was put in to get it off the ground. AI hype came too early, unless whatever they’re not releasing today is different and what we have right this moment is much worse than what they’re holding back.
How little do they value people to believe that they can be so easily replaced? And how could they think that removing so many jobs and careers could go well at all. If people arent working, and their work is tied to their healthcare, their homes, every aspect of their lively hood, and for many provides them purpose, then taking that away is cruel and tortuous.
It’s not at all surprising. Anyone with half a brain has known AGI isn’t the doomsday scenario these idiots trumpet as being. The reason they focus so much on it is to appear wise and ethical about their very stupid and unethical actions. Now, mind you, because they’re stupid, many of them do legitimately believe the greatest threat to humanity isn’t climate change or wealth inequality but that their silicon chip might grow a consciousness (something they are incapable of growing themselves, and therefore is deeply frightening to them). But it’s a reflection of how bad wealth inequality is when the elites continuously forget the poor people actually have to eat food and sleep somewhere in order to praise them for their unparalleled genius.
Guess the ‚we’ll replace all of you with LLMs and robots, and then create a mass surveillance state to keep you all in line‘ isn’t a very popular message.
For those interested, it really depends on where these experts are sourced from.
„AI experts were U.S.-based authors or presenters at AI-related conferences in
2023 or 2024 who reported that their work or research relates to AI.“
So basically I would assume heavily skewed by people working in ai.
I want to hear from people not in the ai scene, such as economists, historians and policy experts at major Universities. Personally I don’t consider someone working for a big tech company a reliable expert, they technically are an expert, however potentially are very biased, also knowing about and using Ai is very different to the economic and political questions around ai for that you need other experts particularly economics and economic historians.