Politics & Stuff

[Vesper 29,144]

12 hours ago, robsblubot said:

The problems discussed today are several decades in the future (maybe 100 years+?).

you seemingly do not understand a basic exponential growth curve then 

 or  (where the argument x is written as an exponent)

 

nor apparently the concept of generativeness

[cosmicway 1,333]

13 hours ago, lucio said:

people will rise up and kill the computer nerds who make this AI cringe 

Why ?
When you go to the bank and it's 5 past 3 and the doors automatically close do you break them ?
The robots will not turn hostile (maybe at some final stage they will).
Also they will have people as frontmen.

[Vesper 29,144]

12 hours ago, lucio said:

people will rise up and kill the computer nerds who make this AI cringe 

the genie is already out of the bottle m8

there are obviously multiple points in history where you can say the threat started

but to narrow it down I would draw a line under November 30, 2022

that is when ChatGPT, the first remotely truly powerful (and yet embryonic compared to what is to come) chatbot was released into the open, interconnective ecosphere

humankind is already being so affected and manipulated by AI, but again, it is nothing comapred to what is to come

[Vesper 29,144]

let me re-post this basic intro on some of the dangers of generative AI

 

Mo Gawdat is the Former Chief Business Officer of Google X Development

X Development LLC, doing business as X (formerly Google X), is an American semi-secret research and development facility and organization founded by Google in January 2010.

[cosmicway 1,333]

The jobs that vanish is an old story.
The neighbourhood typist is one.
Last time I visited one was in 1982, a little before the home line printer. My father gave me some documents he wanted typed.
Funny thing that happened that day was this:
The typist had a stack of papers on the next table. While she was typing I said "you need those ? I want them as scrap paper". She says "ok - take them".
Then I read the back side and it was a list of shops of the neighbourhood as compiled in the local PASOK party headquarters. In it the various shopkeepers were described as "reactionaries", "exponents of the right" and such names. The PASOK party was fresh in government, in its pre-USA days.

 

[cosmicway 1,333]

You can't say that AI is per se hostile.
But it may be superior.
If you are against AI you are also against modern football systems and you want WM to come back.

[Fulham Broadway 16,962]

Never mind about Artificial Intelligence, some real intelligence would be good

[Vesper 29,144]

to put it simply, very simply

at this moment AI, through social media and other architectures (both electronic and human) is ramping up FUD in humankind

FUD = Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt

Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.

 

[cosmicway 1,333]

Look suppose I give you a horse race card.
You need to spend one-two hours to work out the form.
But AI can do it at the push of a button.
Of course if you go to the races and hang around there is hanky panky business going on you can sniff and it's better than form analysis.
But form analysis is a necessary prerequisite and if AI does it for you, you must be pretty archaic not to use.

Edited April 23, 2024 by cosmicway

[robsblubot 3,555]

28 minutes ago, Vesper said:

you seemingly do not understand a basic exponential growth curve then 

 or  (where the argument x is written as an exponent)

 

nor apparently the concept of generativeness

I don’t know many things, but these are pretty familiar to me especially exponential growth, given it’s something that pertains my daily work. Many algos have exponential growth relative to the dataset.

generativeness I learned when I was 15 when I studied a stupid language called prolog, which was supposed to be the AI language — ML engines were all written in C despite the promises.

These predictions are BS and that’s an opinion—no facts here. It’s actually pretty fucking ironic that an event so unique and new is so easy to predict (and far into the future) by your friendly YouTuber.

the jobs will exponentially vanish tho. Industrial Revolution on steroids.

[cosmicway 1,333]

5 minutes ago, robsblubot said:

I don’t know many things, but these are pretty familiar to me especially exponential growth, given it’s something that pertains my daily work. Many algos have exponential growth relative to the dataset.

generativeness I learned when I was 15 when I studied a stupid language called prolog, which was supposed to be the AI language — ML engines were all written in C despite the promises.

These predictions are BS and that’s an opinion—no facts here. It’s actually pretty fucking ironic that an event so unique and new is so easy to predict (and far into the future) by your friendly YouTuber.

the jobs will exponentially vanish tho. Industrial Revolution on steroids.

What he means is the rate at which civilization is progressing.
Suppose year 1924 to year 2024 counts as one unit.
Then 1824 to 1924 how many units ? 
Let's say one unit again.
But as we go back the units per one hundred years definitely get smaller.
So the Romans of 300 AD were really better than the Macedonians of 200 BC ? I doubt it.
The earliest finds of human activity are 3 million years old and it looks as if there is some exponential growth.

Edited April 23, 2024 by cosmicway

[Vesper 29,144]

Just now, robsblubot said:

I don’t know many things, but these are pretty familiar to me especially exponential growth, given it’s something that pertains my daily work. Many algos have exponential growth relative to the dataset.

generativeness I learned when I was 15 when I studied a stupid language called prolog, which was supposed to be the AI language — ML engines were all written in C despite the promises.

These predictions are BS and that’s an opinion—no facts here. It’s actually pretty fucking ironic that an event so unique and new is so easy to predict (and far into the future) by your friendly YouTuber.

the jobs will exponentially vanish tho. Industrial Revolution on steroids.

to blithely dismiss one of the fairly central architects in re AI developmental roll-out as 'your freindly YouTuber' says far more about you than me

but let's take it up a notch in terms of centrality to AI as a whole and see why Geoffrey Hinton is worried about the future of AI

Geoffrey Hinton, known to many as the “Godfather of AI,” recently made headlines around the world after leaving his job at Google to speak more freely about the risks posed by unchecked development of artificial intelligence, including popular tools like ChatGPT and Google’s PaLM. Why does he believe digital intelligence could hold an advantage over biological intelligence? How did he suddenly arrive at this conclusion after a lifetime of work in the field? Most importantly, what – if anything – can be done to safeguard the future of humanity? The University of Toronto University Professor Emeritus addresses these questions and more in The Godfather in Conversation.

00:00 Intro
01:03 Digital intelligence
02:27 Biological intelligence
03:47 Why worry?
04:39 Machine learning
07:07 Neural Nets
13:22 Neural nets and language
17:18 Challenges
18:49 Breakthrough moment
20:41 AlexNet
24:35 Pace of Innovation
26:04 ChatGPT
27:46 Public Reaction
29:49 Benefits for society
33:25 Pace of innovation
35:48 Sudden realization
37:13 Role of government
40:08 Big tech
42:32 Advice to researchers
43:50 Understanding risk
45:20 What’s next?

 

 

[cosmicway 1,333]

One yardstick for AI could be the Putnam exam (US maths Olympiad).
I don't have any pure calculus books here - left them in Egnland - but I can barely solve one problem, usually none.
If AI can do the Putnam paper then it wins over human intelligence.
The rest is trivial - just attach some limbs to it so it can walk, use screwdrivers etc.

Edited April 23, 2024 by cosmicway

[Vesper 29,144]

6 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

What he means is the rate at which civilization is progressing.

She (if you were referring to me) and I meant exponential rate of growth in the computational and learning power of generative AI, not human civilisation.

The pace of AI development is exponential, with performance doubling every few months. This trend, known as Moore’s Law, has held steady for AI just as it has for computer processing power. Each new generation of AI algorithms is smarter and more capable than the last.

Moore's law

Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit doubles about every two years. Moore's law is an observation and projection of a historical trend. Rather than a law of physics, it is an empirical relationship linked to gains from experience in production.

[robsblubot 3,555]

10 minutes ago, Vesper said:

to blithely dismiss one of the fairly central architects in re AI developmental roll-out as 'your freindly YouTuber' says far more about you than me

but let's take it up a notch in terms of centrality to AI as a whole and see why Geoffrey Hinton is worried about the future of AI

Geoffrey Hinton, known to many as the “Godfather of AI,” recently made headlines around the world after leaving his job at Google to speak more freely about the risks posed by unchecked development of artificial intelligence, including popular tools like ChatGPT and Google’s PaLM. Why does he believe digital intelligence could hold an advantage over biological intelligence? How did he suddenly arrive at this conclusion after a lifetime of work in the field? Most importantly, what – if anything – can be done to safeguard the future of humanity? The University of Toronto University Professor Emeritus addresses these questions and more in The Godfather in Conversation.

00:00 Intro
01:03 Digital intelligence
02:27 Biological intelligence
03:47 Why worry?
04:39 Machine learning
07:07 Neural Nets
13:22 Neural nets and language
17:18 Challenges
18:49 Breakthrough moment
20:41 AlexNet
24:35 Pace of Innovation
26:04 ChatGPT
27:46 Public Reaction
29:49 Benefits for society
33:25 Pace of innovation
35:48 Sudden realization
37:13 Role of government
40:08 Big tech
42:32 Advice to researchers
43:50 Understanding risk
45:20 What’s next?

 

 

I will check it out and hope he mentions the “unknown unknowns”, which is what I find severely missing in all these predictions.

I will remain very skeptical on this.

Although I have to admit that it certainly seems more fun than to discuss where the next nuclear bomb will detonate.

[Vesper 29,144]

3 main things worry me to core atm in terms of existential threats to the future of humankind

in no order (and at some levels all are interconnected)

Nuclear Weapons

AI

Global Climate Change

 

at a more immediate level:

the possible re-election of Trump and then the Republicans retaining control the US House of Representatives and gaining back the US Senate (wherein a christo-fascistic minority would hold the whip hand over all 3 branches of the most powerful nation in human history's 3 branches of its federal government (Executive, Judicial (the US Supreme Court especially), and Legislative)

[Vesper 29,144]

6 minutes ago, robsblubot said:

it certainly seems more fun than to discuss where the next nuclear bomb will detonate

the main scenarios (and none are imminet atm)

in no order

Israel on Iran

India v Pakistan in re their border regions

Russian tactical use in Ukraine if Putin thinks that he both can get away with it AND that it is his only main functional option left to fully winning it back

North Korea if they go full death cult and Kim Jong Un thinks he is going to be taken out (targets would likely be SoKo, Japan, and (100 per cent suicidally) the US, I wager)

Iran (whether directly or through the use of proxies) IF they actually can get them made and they feel that they are going to be flattened (the Mullahs are NOT suicidal, so they would have to be 100 per cent convinced they are about to be taken out)

China tactical use on Taiwan if they decide to take it back and feel that (like Putin above) they can both get away with it AND that it is their last best option for a quick conclusion to the takeover

Sunni rando terror nuke(s) (likely sourced from renegade elements in Pakistan) The targets could be anywhere (US, Europe, Middle East, Afghanistan, India, Russia, etc etc, even Africa)

Samson Option (launch all 400+ thermonukes globally) by Israel if they think they are going down (least likely of all of these)

 

wildcard

the UK finally settles the French question of the last 1000 years (I jest!)

 

 

[Vesper 29,144]

Rwanda bill passes: Detention of migrants can start in days

The legislation has now formally passed after the Lords decided not to table any further amendments

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rwanda-bill-rishi-sunak-house-lords-peers-rw78c9vb8

Rishi Sunak’s new Rwanda legislation will pave the way for the detention of migrants within days under plans to get the first deportation flights off the ground by July.

The prime minister said that the government has reserved 2,200 detention spaces and already chartered planes to ensure flights can begin in ten to 12 weeks’ time.

He promised that planes would depart for Kigali “come what may” and that there would then be a “regular rhythm of multiple flights every month” over the summer and beyond. The Rwanda bill has now formally passed after the Lords decided not to table any further amendments.

James Cleverly, the home secretary, said the bill passing through parliament is a “landmark moment in our plan to stop the boats”.

In a video shared on Twitter/X, he said: “The Safety of Rwanda Bill has passed in parliament and it will become law within days.

“The Act will prevent people from abusing the law by using false human rights claims to block removals. And it makes clear that the UK parliament is sovereign, giving government the power to reject interim blocking measures imposed by European courts.

“I promised to do what was necessary to clear the path for the first flight. That’s what we have done. Now we’re working day in and day out to get flights off the ground.”

 

Crossbench peer Lord Anderson said that his amendment had been the last one standing. He said that the purpose of parliamentary ping pong was to persuade the government to agree a compromise but they had refused to do so.

“The time has come to accept the primacy of the elected house and withdraw from the fray,” he said.

After the government’s treaty with Rwanda has been ratified — expected later this week — the government will be able to detain migrants in removal centres. They will remain at the centres as long as there is a “reasonable prospect” that they will be removed.

The government is refusing to say when it will begin detaining migrants amid concerns that they could abscond. Officials have identified 150 people who arrived in Britain before March last year who are considered “legally watertight” cases. They have already been screened by Rwanda before their planned removal.

Speaking earlier from Downing Street, Sunak said: “Enough is enough. No more prevarication, no more delay. Parliament will sit there tonight and vote, no matter how late it goes. No ifs, no buts. These flights are going to Rwanda.

“The success of this deterrent doesn’t rest on one flight alone. It rests on the relentless, continual process of successfully and permanently removing people to Rwanda … with a regular rhythm of multiple flights every month over the summer and beyond until the boats are stopped.”

• Trevor Phillips: Rwanda vote shows dire need for House of Lords reform
• What is the Rwanda bill — and how many will be deported?

After Home Office figures showed small boat crossings were up by a quarter so far this year, Sunak argued that only the “systematic deterrent” of deportation to Rwanda would ultimately stem the flow across the Channel.

Under the legislation, migrants can appeal against deportation only with “compelling evidence” that they will face serious and irreversible harm in Rwanda, rather than on general claims about the country’s safety.

Migrants can appeal to the Home Office and then to an Upper Tribunal in a process that is likely to take at least six weeks and could leave some cleared for deportation in June.

The final resort is an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which blocked the last attempt to send flights to Rwanda in 2022 by issuing interim injunctions. However, the court has since increased the threshold for blocking deportations to proving that they would pose a threat to an individual’s “life and limb”.

The prime minister said he was “confident” removals to Rwanda would be compliant with international law, but that he was prepared to tell ministers to ignore interim injunctions if necessary.

He also declined to rule out leaving the ECHR, although he would face a cabinet revolt if he did so. “If it ever comes to a choice between securing our borders and membership of a foreign court, I’m of course always going to prioritise our national security,” he said.

The Safety of Rwanda bill led to a late-night stand-off between the Commons and the Lords as MPs rejected the two Lords amendments that have been the final sticking points.

Michael Tomlinson, the illegal migration minister, said the government would not compromise and accept the two main amendments being pushed by the Lords. He said requirements of independent verification of Rwanda’s safety and exemption for Afghans who helped British forces were “unnecessary”. Late on Monday evening the Lords dropped the Afghanistan amendment.

• Revealed: UK targets four countries for Rwanda deal
• Labour ‘jitters’ emerge over migration policy

Robert Buckland, the former justice secretary, rebelled to back both amendments, while Sir Jeremy Wright, a former attorney general, voted for one.

Lord Carlile of Berriew, a crossbencher, said that Sunak wanted parliament to “say that an untruth is a truth”, calling the bill “ill-judged, badly drafted, inappropriate, illegal in current UK and international law”.

Ministers could be hit by legal action as soon as next Tuesday. The FDA, a union representing senior civil servants, is expected to convene its executive committee next Monday. The union is likely to launch a judicial review the following day, arguing that ministers’ new power to disregard interim ECHR rulings would mean telling civil servants to break international law.

Government insiders admitted they are nervous about making public when they would begin to detain migrants to be removed, given the fear some could abscond.

The Rwandan parliament last week passed legislation to improve the country’s asylum system. Home Office insiders said they were hopeful that ratification of the treaty with Rwanda would be completed by the end of the week.

A blame game unfolded in Whitehall after internal government documents disclosed within moments of Sunak’s press conference showed the first Rwanda flight was “provisionally scheduled for June”. The papers were believed to be old but brought by a minister to Sunak’s Downing Street press conference and then left under their chair when they left. Five ministers sat in the front row for the speech. Sources close to Grant Shapps, James Cleverly, Victoria Prentis and Michael Tomlinson denied them being the culprit. Andrew Mitchell, the deputy foreign secretary, did not respond to a request to comment.

Labour blamed Sunak for delays in pushing through the legislation. Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said Downing Street could have brought back the bill before Easter but chose not to “because they always want someone else to blame”. Cooper called the Rwanda scheme an “extraordinary gimmick” that would fail to stop small boat arrivals.

The prospect of flights commencing within months could put some airlines at risk of criticism by the UN. Three special rapporteurs warned earlier this month that commercial airlines and regulators could be “complicit in violating” international human rights by facilitating removals. “If airlines and aviation authorities give effect to state decisions that violate human rights, they must be held responsible for their conduct,” they said.