> Only a slave quantifies its existence through productivity
> If I can turn myself into a mechanism that takes input and consistently works towards some goal...
This is, in fact, a quasi-religion, if you think about it. Its central dogma is that humans are no different from machines, so we can be reduced to automatas with well-defined inputs, outputs, productivity and other measurable metrics.
*Productivity is your heart,
Corporation is your body and
GDP is your god*
> why smart, very technical people can't just talk about LLMs honestly
Because those smart people are usually low-rung employees while their bosses are often AI fanatics. Were they to express anti-AI views, they would be fired. Then this mentality slips into their thinking outside of work.
In that case, LLMs must be written off as very knowledgeable crackpots because of their tendency to make things up. That's how we would treat a scientist who's caught making things up.
The fault is well known: chatbots are bootlickers. They always praise users and never criticize them, so chatbots are quickly promoted to the personal advisor position. The AI of Sauron of technological age.
This is a very real worry for the AI rollout for the general population. But are folks here using AI to blow smoke up their asses as a sibling comment stated? I'd like to believe we're using it to ask questions, prototype, and then measure... not just blow smoke up there...
10 years from now: "my AI brain implant erased all my childhood memories by mistake." Why would anyone do that? Because running it in the no_sandbox mode will give people an intellectual edge over others.
"Technocracy advocates contended that price system-based forms of government and economy are structurally incapable of effective action, and promoted a society headed by technical experts, which they argued would be more rational and productive."
Big corpos have reached the stage where they can hire ex-politburo apparatchiks from the soviets or china, straight into C-suite roles, and nothing will materially change.
That's also a good test for chatbots: give it a picture and ask it to write a shadertoy demo that make this picture a 3d animation. So far the results are meh.
Birds don't need airports, don't need expensive maintenance every N hours of flight, they run on seeds and bugs found everywhere that they find themselves, instead of expensive poisonous fuel that must be fed to planes by mechanics, they self-replicate for cheap, and the noises they produce are pleasant rather than deafening.
> If I can turn myself into a mechanism that takes input and consistently works towards some goal...
This is, in fact, a quasi-religion, if you think about it. Its central dogma is that humans are no different from machines, so we can be reduced to automatas with well-defined inputs, outputs, productivity and other measurable metrics.
would be its motto.reply