Opened inkscape for the first time and put together something now that these ai companies are just flat out saying that we don’t deserve ram.
Opened inkscape for the first time and put together something now that these ai companies are just flat out saying that we don’t deserve ram.
They don’t get money from those things tho
They just burn money, they literally can’t make any
Investment firms do, which are the ones giving them money.
In effect, yes, that is how it works and they do get money from it.
Investment firms like returns
They’re just starting to realize they’ll never see one from this, and once it’s apparent to enough of them, the spigot is gonna close
Investment firms create returns through market manipulation.
Thats all these AI firms are to them. The product itself is irrelevant. A funding round increases speculation.
They make money on it going up, and they make money on it going down. Don’t expect them to stop shoveling money in just because its “unprofitable” for the company they are investing in.
The stock valuation is the only profit they need.
They only make money on it going down if they get the right valuation and find a big enough sucker to buy their shares
Something they have historically been extremely good at, yes.
Pershing Square in 2020 is the most recent one I can think of. In terms of industries you’ve got the obvious subprime market example, the telecom industry in the late 90s, and probably the best example of an entirely fake industry - forestry/reverse mergers about 15 years ago with Chinese Forestry companies that were basically complete fabrications.
This is what they do.
Edit: typo, should have been 15 not 25.
The subprime mortgage shit was only profitable because they got bailed out by the government tho
Hopefully it doesn’t happen again, but if it does, the difference is that AI companies, if bailed out directly, would immediately lose all of the bailout money. If the banks got bailed out, I doubt they would give any more money to the AI people
It was bailed out because the people who drop cash into elections (large investors) would have been impacted.
If it got to bailout for AI, they’d profit from the bailout, talk it up for retail, have their market news correspondents talk up about how there is huge profit to be made to get more retail investors (ie: bagholders) roped in, and profit off the drop.
This is what history tells me, you can come to your own conclusions of course, but IMO… AI is just the newest vehicle for the same story we’ve seen cycle (faster every time it seems) over the past… Well, century at this point. Maybe more but before the stock market I’m without examples I’m personally aware of.
I hear what you’re saying, but I think people have finally become wise to their game, so it would be interesting to see how they react to it this time around (especially considering how much less they have to justify it this time around)
Why does it need to be profitable to be funded and used by the government as a weapon? Allowing people to use it is literally giving the government access to see everything, from systems to thoughts.
So, I’d say it’s profitable af.
Someone would still need to pay for it, regardless of how useful it is.
Useful is not the same thing as profitable.
AI is not being used as a weapon, it is being used as an accountability sink for the people using the weapons. Also useful, but not profitable.
If you don’t think AI is being used as a weapon, you’re in on it.
I think we have a disagreement about what counts as a weapon.
The missles that the US military willfully deployed to triple tap the children’s school in Iran were weapons. The AI “Targeting systems” that told them that children’s school was a valid target is not a “weapon” in the sense that it doesn’t do anything other than identify “targets”.
The purpose of this is to allow the user to knowingly commit war crimes, while being able to put the accountability for target acquisition onto the AI.
Israel uses it in the same way to prosecute their ongoing genocide of the Palestinians.
Do you know of an alternate way in which the AI is being used as a weapon? I haven’t heard of one, but i would be interested to learn new information.
(To be clear, I am in no way pro-AI, and i do not think the way that it is being used in war is acceptable. I just don’t think an LLM constitutes a weapon in and of itself)
The weapon is ai being used to attack in a cyber war… or locally in silencing disobedience. Weapons don’t always have to blow up.
They can use them to hack, yeah, thats fair.
What do you mean by “locally in silencing disobedience”?
Employing them to hack locally. If someone is causing trouble, go hack them. I use the term hack very very loosely just to illustrate the point. I just see like a 1990s montage of people typing on keyboards with really cool haircuts that were edgy for the time.
It can also be used to spread misinformation. We have already seen Grok Spit out some very offensive stuff. What if people stop challenging it or it starts doing it in such a way that no one notices? That is even better than propaganda. Literally having the ability to answer someone’s question in such a way that it can change their opinion.
Fuuuuukkkingggg rrraaawwww pooooweeerrrr.
We are so fucked 🙃🙂🙃
It’s not better than propaganda, it’s still propaganda, quality aside.
The term “locally” would imply that they are on your home network, which I don’t see happening for most people.
Don’t be a defeatist, we are not fucked.
Bullets are weapons, guns are not weapons.
Thats not a great analogy
A gun doesn’t obfuscate your accountability
It would be more accurate of my argument to say “carbombs are weapons, cars are not weapons”
Neither of those analogies cover the element of obfuscating accountability tho, which again, is what they are using the AI to do.
You do not need AI to blow up a children’s school.
You use the AI so you can say “oops, i didn’t mean to triple tap that children’s school, the computer told me it was terrorists”
The fact that AI obfuscates responsibility doesn’t actually change its role. AI trained to pick targets are obviously weapons.
They’re just autonomous weapons, or maybe more similar to mines. Set it and forget it! If they walk on the mine, that’s their fault.
My understanding of the way theyre using it is that it is not directly in charge of munitions.
Which is to say, the AI does not fire the missle, a human fires the missle. That human is (theoretically) able to dodge accountability because they just pretend to believe what the AI says is completely accurate.
Imagine a sniper rifle with a thermal scope. The scope is detachable, it can be used without the gun, but not as a weapon. The gun can be used without the scope, as a weapon, and has other methods of target acquisition available (iron sights if nothing else).
When you look through the thermal scope you see a heat signiature, but it obfuscates if the target is an enemy or a civilian. So using the heat scope allows you to pretend that you thought the civilians you murdered were actually enemy combatants.
A mine doesn’t need a human to detonate it, and the powers that be are not (yet) psychotic enough to give control of the weapons systems to the AI.