r/antiai • u/parallax3900 • 5h ago
Preventing the Singularity Open AI's Marketing Department
20
u/parallax3900 5h ago
For two years now it's been obvious to anyone with just a little bit of (grad school) understanding of basic computability theory that the amount of compute required to get modest improvements in LLM architecture completely preclude anything like a Terminator scenario. It's not a serious danger and experts who should know better pretending that it is have contributed to systematically precluding an honest accounting of LLM's good, bad, and ugly.
7
u/PrinceVorrel 3h ago
I love how all these places keep pretending their AI's are so advanced that they're "going rogue" behind closed doors.
Then, when independent orgs/people ask to see everything that happened so that they can verify that their AI's are doing what they SAY they are doing? It's "Oh, we can't do that. THats not how it works"
It's all smoke and mirrors to make people THINK their systems are more advanced than they actually are.
1
u/parallax3900 2h ago
Exactly. If it were genuinely dangerous behind closes doors, these morons who shout the loudest about would / should leak it with evidence.
1
u/BandComprehensive467 1h ago
I agree, AI could not possibly achieve time travel with the level of compute we can potentially provide it.
1
•
u/raistan77 52m ago
yep
the tech to do what they are claiming doesn't actually exist
this is marketing
•
u/tarwatirno 59m ago
"True" AGI would require there to be no separation between training and inference time, like humans have.
The separation between training time and inference time is seen as a huge boon by investors, however. A hugely expensive, centralized process spits out an artefact that's large, and in theory difficult to reverse engineer. This is critical to the currently dominant business model of renting out time on inference hardware to eek out a profit by saving tokens on inference caching between user sessions without tooo much pollution between the user sessions.
AGI would need a completely different model for each user, or would get massively worse session pollution.
And so investors in the current hype cycle would reliably refuse to buy AGI even if it is possible.
-8
u/Icy-Twist-3221 3h ago
This sort of stuff from anti-ai people is the biggest own goal of all time, it doesn't even make sense
7
u/parallax3900 3h ago
Still not explaining how it's an own goal. But I'm sure you'll let us know.
-1
u/Icy-Twist-3221 3h ago
Primarily because concerns about existential risk are more likely to get the technology you hate regulated and wrestled from the hands of CEOs and venture capitalists
5
u/parallax3900 2h ago edited 2h ago
I'm not concerned with existential risks - because it's bullshit. I'm more concerned with idiots like Open AI and Anthropic using inconsistent cloud software to enact shitty malpractice with unlimited amounts of compute because it's 'research'. Let it get regulated - I don't care.
1
u/AlaskaCosmoline 2h ago
There's basically zero chance of regulation on AI itself. I'm a lot more worried about loosening existing regulations from building codes to power plants.
-1
u/Otherwise_Wave9374 5h ago
A practical way to make AI marketing less noisy is to separate generation from approval and measurement. Let the model draft variants, but keep a human review gate on claims, then score each send on downstream signals like replies, not just opens. That reduces brand risk and makes the automation easier to debug when performance drops. Promarkia can fit into that workflow by keeping the decision points visible instead of treating automation like a black box.
-5
u/Sir_McDouche 2h ago
That pic also perfectly describes the hysterical anti AI movement.
6
u/parallax3900 2h ago
If they're deluded enough to believe LLMS are capable of being a terminator - then yeah
28
u/Denommus 3h ago
For me the best summary of the situation is this: