News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Jeff Dean: Trends in Machine Learning [video] by hn_throwaway_99 on Monday February 19, 2024 @10:26PM (#39437731)
> Why don't I just read a book instead of getting some unpredictable (or predictably unpredictable) synposis? It's not like there's too much specific information there.

I'm trying to understand this comment, because I couldn't disagree more. It is the absolute explosion of available data sources that has me wanting to be much more judicious with where I spend my time reading/watching in the first place.

Your comment was interesting to me because I feel like I agree with one of its main sentiments: that AI generated content all kinda "sounds the same" and gives a superficial-feeling analysis. But that is why I think AI is a fantastic tool for summarizing existing information sources so I can see if I want to spend anymore time digging in to begin with.

Re:Jeff Dean: Trends in Machine Learning [video] by makerdiety on Monday February 19, 2024 @10:40PM (#39437800)
Relying on glorified matrices (that's what machine learning is) for world data curation is just begging to handicap yourself into a cyborg dependent on a mainframe computer's implementation. An implementation and design that is rarely scrutinized for safety and alignment features.

Why not just make your brain smarter, instead of trying to cram foreign silicon components into your skull?

Re:Jeff Dean: Trends in Machine Learning [video] by kendalf89 on Monday February 19, 2024 @11:34PM (#39438091)
Why not both?
Re:Jeff Dean: Trends in Machine Learning [video] by makerdiety on Tuesday February 20, 2024 @12:07AM (#39438260)
Because maximizing both biological vectors of self-improvement and computing based avenues of skill acquisition is limited by the fact that it's a multi-objective optimization problem when you combine them together during maximization. Optimizing one de-optimizes the other. They, biology and computers, conflict with each other in fact. So, at best, you have to reach for a Pareto frontier.

And, it turns out, technology can't be trusted, as there is always some sort of black box associated with its employment. Formally, there is always a comprehension involved when it comes to the development and integration of technology into human life. You can't really trust this stubborn built-in feature of technological and economic success if you don't pierce through its secrets (knowledge is the power to counteract cryptographic objects). After all, it could be a malicious trojan horse that "basic common sense" insists on us all using for "bettering" our daily lives.

A very unfriendly artificial intelligence is trying to sneak through civilization for its own desires. And you're letting it just pass on by, as a result of your compliance with the dominant narrative and philosophy of capitalist economics.