How interest changes
History starts here
The chart will appear after repeat observations. The current metric comes from the source.
13 source pointsReal observations only. History before source connection is not reconstructed.
Book review: Obsolete: The AI Industry’s Trillion Dollar Race to Replace Us? and How to Stop It, by Garrison Lovely. Obsolete is a strange book. It’s mostly good, but the quality varies a good deal. Lovely is well informed about concerns that AI might kill us all, and doesn’t dispute those concerns. Yet he focuses much more on more ordinary concerns, in particular excessive concentration of power. He is somewhat successful at portraying mundane harms of this year, and longer term risks (will AI kill us all in the 2030s), as similar problems. I usually cringe at such efforts, but Lovely is quite good at defusing the tensions between those two types of concern. E.g. he discusses AI-assisted political coups by a CEO such as Musk in a way that sounds almost realistic using current AI, while also warning about dramatic increases in that risk as AI becomes more powerful. Most of the book is written for a pretty broad audience. I’m annoyed that he added in a modest number of gratuitous culture war quips that will repel some Republicans. He mitigates that a little by also complaining about widespread corruption among leading Democrats, but many Republicans won’t read far enough to notice that. Obsolete also contains a few distracting sections on topics such as how to improve drug development. That passage would make an excellent blog post, but feels quite out of place in the middle of policy advice for dealing with AI risks. Two examples of Lovely describing his concerns well: He answers the “can’t you just unplug it” question by pointing to OpenAI’s inability to unplug a rogue CEO in November 2023. He shows the Andy Jones chart of the horse population with a nearly 90% drop between 1930 and 1950. > For the first 120 years of that steady improvement, horses didn’t notice at all. … Progress in engines was steady. Equivalence to horses was sudden. China Lovely is correct to report that AI companies aren’t very good at keeping secrets, but he overstates how much that
Translation pending · showing the source descriptionThe chart will appear after repeat observations. The current metric comes from the source.
13 source pointsReal observations only. History before source connection is not reconstructed.
The text is an explanatory article written in the style of Arnold Lobel's Frog and Toad, aimed at helping people discuss HuggingFace with their mothers, accompanied by art by HungerArtist.
yesterdayLessWrongThe post argues that while AI may reduce the cost of goods, it could also rapidly decrease the value of human labor, leading to a scenario where people cannot afford basic necessities despite their low prices. The author uses energy cost as a proxy, suggesting that AI can perform tasks at a fraction of the cost of human labor, but essential goods like food require more energy to produce, making them relatively more expensive.
5 days agoLessWrongThe article discusses how the AI debate is not aligning with traditional polarization patterns, noting bipartisan opposition to data centers and AI legislation, as well as unexpected cross-party reactions to new technologies. It redefines polarization as a systemic issue involving affective, legislative, and issue-based divisions that create a self-reinforcing cycle.
6 days agoHacker NewsGPT 6.1 Sol is a new AI model offering near-Astra-level intelligence at a significantly lower cost.
2 days agoLobstersThe 'Yes, no AI' feature has been introduced.
3 days agoLobstersThe text discusses the characteristics of a serious AI product, focusing on its design, functionality, and real-world applications.
3 days ago