Ah, but those “intelligent” people cannot be very intelligent if they are not billionaires. After all, the AI companies know exactly how to assess intelligence:

Microsoft and OpenAI have a very specific, internal definition of artificial general intelligence (AGI) based on the startup’s profits, according to a new report from The Information. … The two companies reportedly signed an agreement last year stating OpenAI has only achieved AGI when it develops AI systems that can generate at least $100 billion in profits. That’s far from the rigorous technical and philosophical definition of AGI many expect. (Source)

To do it based on intent would create some difficult grey areas - for example, video game creators would have to try to make their games as compelling as possible without passing a more or less vague threshold and breaking the law. The second approach of working on the ways different types of data can be used sounds more promising.

How would you identify the kinds of algorithms that should be banned, as opposed to all the other kinds of algorithms? I have a feeling that would be tricky.

deleted by creator

It’s a term invented by Last.fm that didn’t really catch on more generally because it’s too silly even for the Internet.

I don’t trust Bryan Lunduke as a source. He fell into QAnon conspiracy-type stuff and MAGA politics. Not a sign of good judgment.

Once again ordinary people in the West are saved from affordable, low-pollution living, and Western companies are saved from having to compete.

It would be a single point of failure for many apps in case the curators of F-Droid were dishonest or hacked. They could insert bad things into lots of packages without having to change the public source code. But it also becomes the only point where malware or backdoors could be inserted that way, instead of having to trust every single developer to build honestly off the source code, which we’d have to do if they just stuck prebuilt binaries up there. I don’t know how rational I’m being, but it makes me trust F-Droid apps more that they build each one themselves.

You know what they meant by the first one. The second one is about people not being interested in dumb products like the Logitech AI mouse. Corporations are all jamming AI into their products and marketing materials not because users like it (they don’t) but because they hope it will attract investors. So AI is more interesting to investors than to people who don’t want it in their mouse.

The problem is that Librewolf’s continued existence depends on Firefox continuing to exist. And while I like Vivaldi (but not its closed-sourceness), if all browsers end up being Chromium-based, Google still has an effective monopoly on web standards.

It’s just about marketing. People don’t know about what they don’t hear about, and the wealthier companies can make sure people hear about them. There’s no budget for that with regular Fediverse sites.

Interesting topic but what a terribly written article. Did they just ask ChatGPT a few questions and paste together random chunks of the answers? It keeps suggesting there are downsides, but never even names one.

I’ve been nervous of phoning people since long before cellphones were invented, precisely because it always seemed rude to make someone’s phone ring and demand a conversation when they’re in the middle of whatever they’re doing. It’s interesting to see more people coming to see it like this.

Once it develops further I would genuinely consider using it as my main OS on my laptop.

Don’t hold your breath. In 23 years they have got as far as R1 Beta 4.

I’m old enough to remember the start of eternal September. It hasn’t stopped yet.

my downvotes. They are reserved for low-quality content, not that which I personally disagree with.

There was more of that in the early days of Reddit. At some point everyone abandoned that principle, and from them on every thread became more of a battle than a conversation.

Some of the old LG phones (the V series) were known and sold for the quality of their audio. If you can find one of those on eBay it should be pretty cheap.

Yeah, this one report from Puget Systems doesn’t outweigh the many reports, going back years now, researched in detail by Steve, and confirmed by sources at Intel’s biggest customers, of problems with Intel’s CPUs. This report is just such an outlier. Intel has lost trust by building faulty CPUs for so long, being apparently unable to act quickly to resolve the issues, and covering up the problems to keep its share price up and dodge the cost of RMAs.

They should be thinking of the loss involved in replacing these CPUs as an investment in Intel’s long-term reputation. But instead they’re thinking “how can we make the line go up this quarter?” and cutting staff. It’s shortsighted, as all public compliments are these days.

Ah, I didn’t understand that you were asking about a fictional scenario. I don’t know about your main question but I like your notion of the social integration of humanoid AGIs with unique life experiences, and your observation that there’s no need to assume AGI will be godlike and to be feared. Some ways of framing the alignment problem seem to carry a strange assumption that AGI would be both smarter than us and yet less able to recognize nuance and complexity in values, and that it would therefore be likely to pursue some goals to the exclusion of others in a way so crude we’d find horrific.

There’s no reason an AGI with a lived experience of socialization not dissimilar to ours couldn’t come to recognize the subtleties of social situations and respond appropriately and considerately. Your mortal flesh and blood AI need not be some towering black box occupied with its own business whose judgements and actions we struggle to understand, but if integrated into society would be motivated like any social being to find common ground for communication and understanding, and tolerable societal arrangements. Even if we’re less smart that doesn’t mean it automatically considers us unworthy of care - that assumption always smells like a projection of the personalities of people who imagine it. And maybe it would have new ideas about these that could help us stop repeating the same political mistakes again and again.