Being subject to social pressure doesn’t make you weak or less than. It is a normal part of being a social animal.

Why? I consistently see these anti AI purity tests come up.

We need people who are skeptical to engage on AI.

People hate technology and change. Before AI it was smartphones. Before smartphones it was photoshop/digital art and CGI. Before CGI it was the Internet. Before Internet it was TV. Before TV it was cars. Before cars it was industry. Before industry it was books.

Someone probably was anti cave paintings because it ruined the skill of passing down the stories by word of mouth.

Something is always coming along that is both horrible for society as it is and something we come to accept as common place. You can want to return to our roots but even that I guarantee you would still pick some level of technology you don’t want to do without.

My worry is that the people we need engaged on AI because they have a healthy mindset to question and wrangle it, are instead being forced to ignore AI or pledge to be anti AI by their social circles and customers.

So instead we have absolute Kool aid drinkers driving the AI adoption.

We went through this with the internet but I think a lot of folks now are too young to remember it and unsurprisingly the people who were anti internet didn’t store their concerns and complaints in the currently used modern repository of all knowledge.

YuzuKey flavored verification cans can keep you authenticated for 2 to 8 hours.

Everything is guessing, only death is certain. I’ve worked with AI/ML for over 15 years long before folks got all hot and bothered by it. Your examples you give are great because if you walked up to a person and just said 5 you might get as random of answers and you gave.

Assuming by AI you mean LLMs, because that is what is hot on social media today, they use statistical probability models to be able to rate their input to output consistency. It is measurable but could never be 100%. No compute or person is 100%, but an LLM is orders of magnitude less consistent than traditional compute.

I use AI on a daily basis. I trust it less than people, but I also am able to feed it dumb questions which is nice.

No

AI is any compute model performing complex enough reasoning that the output does not always resemble the input. They are by definition non deterministic and the same ask can provide different outputs without being influenced by other inputs.

It is hardware. The embargo is on the connectivity silicon used in China because it is full of Chinese backdoors. Unlike the chips made elsewhere that have US backdoors

Making everything run ontop of an LLM was not non deterministic enough. Now with the power of cosmic rays we can guarantee the most non deterministic system possible. With such an unknown state we may finally achieve garbage in sometimes not garbage out compute. Invest in typewriters and monkeys today and you could be a partial owner of the entire works of Shakespeare soon™.

The fact that consumers have LLM garbage shoved in their face doesn’t mean that the exponential increase in other ML use cases isn’t driving life saving technology. The COVID vaccine only deployed as fast as it did because of AI ML. 20% of surgeries right now are robot assisted and all of those use AI ML.

On a personal level I’ve been able to move my family to FOSS because of LLMs. LLMs are very good at understanding how open source software works and translating the workflows to human language. I personally can read man pages but others in my family honestly don’t want to have to in order to just watch a show on AppleTV. I can do this with a small local LLM running on a low wattage micro server.

We are seeing LLMs enabling us easily to overwrite the proprietary software in our home devices and take back hardware and improve repairability so we can stop producing so much E Waste. And the more that companies use LLM code to slop up their embedded devices the easier it becomes.

You can run AI without causing environmental problems just like you can drive cars without burning fossil fuels and you can have industrial production without creating pollutants.

All of that just cuts into the profits though.

You think the wait staff setup the machine to do math wrong?

Year of the Linux desktop pushed out a year due to Linux infighting and intolerable advocates for the 33rd year. Clearly the fault of the other distros as I use Arch.

Would you rather our current administration make their decisions by using the lowest bidder LLM, or their own brains?

I get it, but we should as a community try to be better than that.

AI won’t fail. It already is past the point where failing or being a fad was an option. Even if we wanted to go backwards, the steps that were taken to get us to where we are with AI have burned the bridges. We won’t get 2014 quality search engines back. We can’t unshitify the internet.

That AI is the one you make or at least host. No one is going to host an online AI for you that is 100% ethical because that isnt profitable and it is very expensive.

When you vilianize AI you normalize AI use as being bad. The end result is not people stopping use of AI it is people being more okay with using less ethical AI. You can see this with folks driving SUVs and big trucks. They intentionally pick awful choices because the fatigue of being wrong for driving a car makes them just accept that it doesn’t matter.

It feels dumb, it is dumb, but is what happens.

Nestle bottling water is bad, so my solution will be to never drink any water and make fun of people who do. This is how it always comes off to me.

Who in the world eats hard shell tacos?

Why is your hobby more important than their hobby?

Yea but if someone uses those bindings then you can’t just not support it.

By the time this code gets into a large scale production system it will be 2029. That is when the bugs will come in if someone leveraged the Rust bindings.

You can ask the big company users at that time to contribute their fixes upstream, but if they get resistance because they have relatively junior Rust devs trying to push up changes that only a handful of maintainers understand, the company will just stop upstreaming their changes.

The primary concern that a major open source project like this will have is that the major contributors will decide that interacting with it is more trouble than it is worth. That is how open source projects move to being passion projects and then die when the passion dies.