- 0 Posts
- 11 Comments
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world•Will CEOs eventually have to replace themselves with AI to please shareholders?1·7 days agoSure, but that true AI won’t just involve an LLM, it will be a complex of multi-modal models with specialization and hierarchy–thats basically what big AIs like GPT-5 are doing.
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world•Will CEOs eventually have to replace themselves with AI to please shareholders?2·7 days agoLol the point about “don’t dehumanize” has nothing to do about them or feeling bad for them. They can fuck right off. It’s about us not pretending these aren’t human monsters, as if being human makes us inherently good, as if our humanity somehow makes us inherently above doing monstrous things. No, to be human is to have the capacity for doing great good and for doing the monstrously terrible.
Nazis aren’t monsters because they’re inhuman, they’re monsters because of it. Other species on the planet might overhunt, displace, or cause depopulation through inadvertent ecological change, but only humanity commits genocide.
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world•Will CEOs eventually have to replace themselves with AI to please shareholders?1·7 days agoThis is closer to what I mean by strategy and decisions: https://matthewdwhite.medium.com/i-think-therefore-i-am-no-llms-cannot-reason-a89e9b00754f
LLMs can be helpful for informing strategy, and simulating strings of words that may can be perceived as a strategic choice, but it doesn’t have it’s own goal-oriented vision.
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world•Will CEOs eventually have to replace themselves with AI to please shareholders?75·7 days agoBuddam tsssss! I too enjoy making fun of big business CEOs as mindless trend-followers. But even “following a trend” is a strategy attributable to a mind with reasoning ability that makes a choice. Now the quality of that reasoning or the effectiveness of that choice is another matter.
As tempting as it is, dehumanizing people we find horrible also risks blinding us to our own capacity for such horror as humans.
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world•Will CEOs eventually have to replace themselves with AI to please shareholders?3·7 days agoNo, it’s not paradoxical. You are conflating time points.
I won’t debate the “value” of CEOs, but in this system, their value is subject to market conditions like any other. Human computers were valued much more before electrical computers were created. Aluminum was worth more than gold before a fast and cheap extraction process was invented.
You could not replace a CEO with a Palm pilot 10 years ago.
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world•Will CEOs eventually have to replace themselves with AI to please shareholders?31·7 days agoThey… don’t make strategic decisions… That’s part of why we hate them no? And we lambast AI proponents because they pretend they do.
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Showerthoughts@lemmy.world•If autism is a spectrum, does that mean everyone is on the spectrum?4·14 days agoIt’s up to you if it helps you to think of it that way. However, if everyone is on the spectrum, then “autism” is less useful as a term for categorizing a group of people with a shared condition that may need help/accommodation in specific ways. How do you provide special services for autistic people when everyone is “on the spectrum”. There’s a solution, but requires a different way of categorizing people.
“spectrum” is a useful analogy to the EM spectrum, which is a literal spectrum. The autism spectrum is not a literal spectrum, we call it that because it’s a useful way to understand neurodiveristy. However, like any analogy, it eventually falls apart as you go deeper into applying it. It’s not the complete way to understand autism nor is it the only applicable analogy.
Autism is not fully understood, but it is characterized by several dimensions that each involve variation from the norm due to a complex of causes. This is why the “spectrum” analogy falls apart–it reduced autism to one dimension. Another analogy might be a crystal that grows in multiple directions, with more growth from the centre being divergence from the norm. Some crystals grow a little bit in all directions, some grow only in a couple directions, and every other combination of amount x direction.
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Not The Onion@lemmy.world•Medicare Will Start Paying AI Companies a Share of Any Claims They Automatically RejectEnglish6·19 days agoThe point is fraud. They give you just enough to think they will cover you when you really need it. And by then, they’ve already extracted the optimum amount they were gonna get from you.
Soleos@lemmy.worldto Not The Onion@lemmy.world•Medicare Will Start Paying AI Companies a Share of Any Claims They Automatically RejectEnglish10·19 days agoGarbage humans in, garbage AI out
Yes, everyone should follow the rules. This is about how we as a society handle situations where people break the rules. I’m sure you’ve been pulled over for a traffic violation before. Imagine the best case interaction and the worst case interaction that’s still within the bounds of enforcement regulations, and there’s a spectrum of everything in-between. The problem people are pointing out is that one privileged group of people statistically get better interactions and another group statistically gets worse interactions.