Because if you’re just casting a video, you can still use your PC/phone while it’s playing.

Demonstrating that you’re not on the same team!

real therapy should be free and available

You’re damned right!

Serious question: Let’s say that AI “gets good” and overcomes the hallucination issues. Would it still be negative for mental health? Would it be even worse (because reality sucks for kids right now)?

I want to know if it’s AI that’s the real problem here or the world in which we’re forcing kids to live.

I can imagine a situation where a kid with (insert serious problems) asks AI to be realistic about their future job/economic prospects. It returns truthful statistics, then that kid commits suicide. Was the AI culpable?

What if it recommended joining a revolutionary group as the most likely way to improve their lives or the lives of their children/families?

What if it suggested that sacrifice is necessary to improve the condition of the world?

Would an AI that does these things be good or bad? If the AI’s system prompt has, always tell the truth will we have created a vastly more dangerous monster than the AI we have today?

This is one of those self-fulfilling prophecies. If that system doesn’t declare all inmates as “high risk to murder the people that implemented this system,” it’s obviously broken.

Why? Reverse engineering is neither unethical or illegal.

What’s it good for? I mean, beyond good ol SSH?

Webmin is still around‽

No, the vulnerabilities were always there, AI is just pointing them out publicly.

I used to work as a professional hacker. Let me tell you something that the news never, ever talks about: If a company doesn’t have a bug bounty program, we kept those vulnerabilities to ourselves.

A government has vast resources to do just that: Keep the vulnerabilities to themselves until they feel like using them. They will not disclose them. They will keep them in their back pocket until the day comes when they need them for an op.

The only time they disclose vulnerabilities is when they think they’re too easy to find and there’s a public interest benefit to getting the problem fixed (e.g. the government is using those products).

What this means is that AI really is making FOSS vastly more secure than it ever was. This is probably pissing off government red teams to no end.

What we’re not hearing about as much is AI finding vulnerabilities in closed source products. Not because it’s not finding them, but because the disclosures are kept private (because companies treat it as bad PR and they’re assholes about it).

You can bet your ass that AIs run by state actors are building up massive war chests of vulnerabilities in closed source products right now. We’ll only hear about them after these products get exploited and maybe not even then because so, so many companies have no idea WTF they’re doing in regards to infosec. Think about it: How many CEOs are right now demanding their teams reduce the amount of FOSS they use because of the recent news? These people are idiots and apparently never heard that old joke about a new employee making a $100,000 mistake… “We just spent $100,000 training them!”

Good news: We’re rapidly making FOSS the most secure software ever.

Bad news: We’re doing it in the most painful way possible.

AI isn’t inherently unethical. The very premise of saying such a thing is flawed.

Is it unethical to use AI to find new drugs and medical treatments? To use it for physics research? What about regular research? Writing code?

Where do you draw the line?

Also, AI was used to design the current crop of fusion reactors and the full potential of that is only just getting started. If it turns out that AI solves all the issues and generates a working fusion reactor design, it’ll make every one of your arguments moot. Because that one achievement will be worth everything. It would “save the world” so to speak (from an energy/emissions standpoint).

Chatting with an LLM is less impact than driving a car. Think about that for a second before you say using it is unethical. It’s literally more negative for the world for someone to drive a car every day to work than it is to ask an AI to find something on the Internet or write a program in Python.

Or perhaps your underlying complaint is more about capitalism than it is about AI?

Put it into perspective:

• Everyone doing their laundry uses more water than all data centers combined. Golf courses also use vastly more water.
• Data centers use about 1-2% of global electricity.

People driving cars pollutes more as does global shipping, regular old consumerism, etc. The environmental impact of data centers is negligible in the grand scheme of things.

Now that AI is making open source software the most secure software ever written (the hard way, hehe), not using it to scan your stuff is now considered worst practices and basically idiotic negligence. No company that uses software or anything with firmware can afford to ignore it anymore.

There’s no way out of it. Accept the new AI reality and push for good regulations. Example: If we made it so that all AI data centers had to be powered via renewable energy on site that would allay most of the energy use/environmental concerns.

The anti-AI sentiment here is ridiculous. They were asking a legitimate question!

I just use ollama locally but I keep meaning to setup OpenRouter because I like to play with larger models that my hardware can’t handle and I’d like to be able to pick the best deals 🤷‍♀️

Bah! You ruined my hilarious joke 🤣

But then I’d be guilty! I have some Polymaker filament right here! It’s still new in the box and everything…

Shit, maybe there’s a sketchy filament black market where I can fence it…

You can simulate “ADHD brain” with drugs and conditioning, similar to how PTSD alters people’s brain chemistry.

The human brain is plastic/adaptive and can change, depending on the cost/benefit of action/reward conditioning. Just like how people with ADHD can see some improvement with training, a neurotypical brain can see some ADHD-like changes with the same sort of (anti?) training. That’s what I’m suggesting is happening in this AI study: People were rewarded for using the AI initially (dopamine response) but then that reward (easy way out) was taken away, and they performed more poorly as a result.

It stands to reason that their reward center was trained to behave like an ADHD brain in that it could tell there was not going to be an easy way to gain a reward from the activity, so it didn’t bother putting in the necessary resources to achieve the outcome it would have accomplished if they were never given AI in the first place.

The usual dopamine response was overridden, thus behaving like an ADHD brain.

It sounds like it’s messing with the reward center of the brain which is what ADHD is all about.

I don’t think it’ll happen like Radium or Asbestos because those rely on scarcity. They’re physical things that can be physically controlled.

AI models aren’t like that. In less than a minute anyone can download the latest models. In under an hour, they can have all the latest models sitting on their PC. Right now, there’s a shortage of memory and GPUs which makes them prohibitively expensive for the average person but that won’t always be the case!

Ten years from now, everyone’s phones will have enough capabilities to run models that currently require a PC with a 32GB GPU.

What we could do is force AI companies and software to put warnings in the chat interfaces like cigarette cartons: “WARNING: Using LLMs for just ten minutes increases the likelihood that you will have trouble completing difficult mental tasks afterwards.” (That was in the news this morning)

We also definitely need international treaties that prevent countries from allowing AI to make the decision to kill people or destroy infrastructure. Though honestly, we’re already in a state where countries are willing to kill hundreds of people just to assassinate a single target (e.g. US and Israel bombing an entire building because they think their target is inside).

These are small potatoes, though, compared to what AI could do to capitalism and inequality. The rate at which it is advancing is faster than people/jobs can keep up. It’s like half the population is ferriers and suddenly everyone was just given a free car.

LLMs give people ADHD?

No, no. You’ve got the wrong idea.

Will AI completely ruin a zillion people’s ability to think (beyond what social media already accomplished)? Quite possibly!

I’m just saying there’s nothing we can do to stop it at this point.

You’re about to head down a long, lonely road as normies start using and accepting AI more and more into their lives while you scream into the abyss. I’ve been there with fossil fuels, copyright, software patents, and Linux.

People saying “Just use AI!” Is about to live rent free in your head as your most-hated phrase. Just like, “stop driving gas guzzlers!” Or, “stop bitching about Windows and just install Linux already!” Lives in so many others.

At least most people don’t think of AI as a core part of their identity (e.g. pickup trucks) 🤷