Benedict_Espinosa

joined 1 day ago
[–] Benedict_Espinosa@lemmy.world -1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

I do indeed, and I think that it's a remarkably disingenuous and biased take.

[–] Benedict_Espinosa@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Naturally the guardrails cannot cover absolutely every possible specific use case, but they can cover most of the known potentially harmful scenarios under the normal, most common circumstances. If the companies won't do it themselves, then legislation can push them to do it, for example making them liable, if their LLM does something harmful. Regulating AI is not anti-AI.

[–] Benedict_Espinosa@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (3 children)

Probably the same kind of guardrails that they already have - teaching LLMs to recognise patterns of potentially harmful behaviour. There's nothing impossible in that. Shutting LLMs down altogether is a straw man and extreme example fallacy, when the discussion is about regulation and guardrails.

Discussing the damage LLMs do does not, of course, in any way negate the damage that social media does. These are two different conversations. In the case of social media there's probably government regulation needed, as it's clear by now that the companies won't regulate themselves.

[–] Benedict_Espinosa@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago (5 children)

It's not about banning or refusing AI tools, it's about making them as safe as possible and regulating their usage.

Your argument is the equivalent of "guns don't kill people" or blaming drivers for Tesla's so-called "full self-driving" errors leading to accidents, because "full self-driving" switches itself off right before the accident, leaving the driver responsible as the one who should have paid more attention, even if there was no time left for him to react.

[–] Benedict_Espinosa@lemmy.world 7 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

A kind of computerised profascist authoritarian dystopia, a combination "1984" and "Brave New World" with technocratic oligarchy, total surveillance, killer robots and unsafe self-driving cars in the world increasingly subject to natural catastrophes due to steadily worsening climate change.

[–] Benedict_Espinosa@lemmy.world -2 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Name a thing that is unbiased. It's generally significantly less biased than humans are.

[–] Benedict_Espinosa@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

What could they realistically do, when Trump controls all branches of government from Congress to the Supreme Court? It can be argued that they should have shut down his government in March, when they had the chance to reject the spending bill - but what can they do now?

[–] Benedict_Espinosa@lemmy.world 7 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

European politics is far from perfect, although it is arguably better and less corrupt than in the US now. But it was not politics that killed European mobile phone industry - it was competition along with mismanagement and miscalculations of the European mobile phone manufacturers. Symbian was just a weak and clumsy platform compared to iOS and Android, it could not compete in a changing market.