guyrocketWhat is the next "big thing"?
Right now it seems like its "A.I.". Still big now are the wars in the Middle East and Ukraine. Recently we had COVID 19....
maculataHats made of poop. It’s such a winner. Get in on on the cutting edge of fashion while you can.
The most chic ones are made from your own production plus random dog poo you find locally. Plus some grass for structural strength.
If you knew what’s coming next you could be a very very rich human. This is how the world works
EveryMuffinIsNowEncryptedOne can only hope it’s something that positive…
Yay, better hand grenades!
Pogs are due for a huge comeback (along with all things 1990s).
WASAAAAAAAAAAA~!
late_night-AAAAAAAAAA-
grasshopper_mouse-AAAAAAAA-
Maybe another yoyo comeback?
I’d actually be down for Billie Eilish leading the charge on grunge 2.0. We need angry rock music to criticize this shitty world.
We need angry rock music to criticize this shitty world.
Absolutely.
I’m ready for a new yo-yo craze 1996-8 was the last great resurgence
If it’s not one thing, it’s another.
Random_Character_AI think A.I and sufficiently good robotics will bring back class society to those countries that don’t currectly have it. Elite will become more powerful, corporate power will surpass governments, rest of humanity will wallow in poverty, since they no longer have leverage in society. Whole world will become company driven banana republic.
Soooooo Borderlands?
…and if things in Ukraine get really silly. Fallout.
federalreverse-oldThere are countries with classless societies? Where are they?
Far more likely they’ll erode class systems in countries that do have them by enabling everyone to have the same educational access, healthcare, etc.
I know a lot of people want everything to be bad for some reason but I think you’re gong to be disappointed with how beneficial they are, just like the people who hated autolooms couldn’t even imagine a world where poor people can afford nice clothes so ai haters today will be blown away by the huge social benefits of the technology as it evolves.
Why would those countries educate the general public to disagree with local power structures, when they mostly just need submissive cheap workforce.
Government educates people when they are a part of the nations money flow. When educated citizens are assets. In your basic banana republic model the people are not part of it. They are just cheap labor for low level jobs, living on scraps. Educating them is down right dangerous for the government. If needed, educated personnel are supplied by foreign actors exploiting the situation.
Poverty and lack of education are forms of control and are not fixed by injecting teachers or money.
livusThis is what I think too. Disaster capitalism + surveillance capitalism + massive resource competition due to climate change = neofeudalism.
Bird flu just jumped a couple of species barriers as well.
Clean Water wars
tsonfeirDaddy why is the water red?
It still could happen, but so far it’s proven overhyped.
agamemnonymousIt’s still very much AI for a while. The current incarnation is still in relative infancy, and will only continue to get more capable and disruptive. We’re starting to see the integration with robotics, this is only going to become more significant with time.
It’s likely that the next big thing will be a consequence of AI.
The current AI boom is all based on a single paper from about 7 years ago, and has been achieved by just throwing more and more computing power at it. There has been basically no meaningful architecture improvements in that time and we are already seeing substantial fall off from throwing more power at the problem. I don't think its a given at all that we are close to the kind of disruption you are predicting.
I see AI as something that will go the way of VR or cryptocurrencies or self-driving cars, it won’t fully go away but people will realize that it is not suitable for nearly the number of use cases or improving as quickly as it was claimed it would and will sort of forget about it in most of the areas where it is not really improving anything.
AI is currently being used in both the wars OP mentioned.
Its primary use is always going to be in Surveillance Capitalism. The idea we can get nice things from it is mainly a consolation prize.
I mean yes I can now get AI to draw me a picture or write me an editorial. But meanwhile the IDF can get AI to choose people to kill and use the Wheres Daddy AI program to tell them when someone is at home so they can deliberately bomb him with his family.
So yeah it isn't much for consumers but it's not going away for use on us.
I think those use cases show how particularly bad AI really is considering how many wrong targets they have been bombing and how many bad recommendations consumers still get.
I don’t understand this deliberately pessimistic perspective I keep seeing around AI development that stubbornly ignores every other technological development in history. Even just considering the singular transformer architecture, we’re still seeing significant and novel improvement. In just a couple years we’ve watched the technology go from basic predictive text to high quality image and even video generation, now to real time robotics control.
The transformer architecture is incredibly powerful and flexible. The notion that the basic technology staying the same is an indication of stagnation is as ridiculous as if you said the same of transistors half a century ago. Most of the improvement we see in the near future will be through recursive and multi-modal applications, meta-architechtural developments that don’t require the core technology to change at all.
Sabata11792I think we need to hit the wall and start over with what we learned a few time over to really progress.
Which paper is that?
“The internet has reached the peak of its usability and will never progress much past it’s current level”
This is you in 1997.
Was there actually a statistical argument for that? IIRC the main argument was most people wouldn’t have a use for it, in the guy’s opinion.
There’s stats for this. It’s not certain, but “we’re nearly at peak LLM” has become a reasonable guess in the last few months.
I'm not saying AI can't be disruptive. I'm saying we aren't there. The steady progress you think you are seeing is bought with increased processing power, the science isn't advancing steadily, it advances in unpredictable jumps. Because the performance gained with processing power is reaching its peak, we'll need at least another one of those unpredictable jumps for it to get to a state that will do what the comment I was responding to was claiming. It could be another 50 years before that happens, or it could be tomorrow.
BlizzardThe Witcher 4
poor gta fans
personal quantum computers
Personal quantum computers would be truely useless. They break specific kinds of encryption, and simulate other quantum systems. Other than that, nobody’s been able to devise a way to make them do much practical work.
Really, it’s unfortunate they were named that, because they’re only like computers if you have a solid background in computing to understand the analogy. “Quantum emulator” or “programmable quantum system” might be a better word that wouldn’t make people think it’s the next semiconductor node. Alas, I have no time machine to fix it.
In 1940, Thomas Watson, president of IBM, said the world would ever need at most 5 computers
In 1940 I would have agreed. Nobody had any idea they could be small, fast or convenient. Nobody had even bothered to build one outside of Germany, with ENIAC still a few years away, and synthetic semiconductors hadn’t been invented, so he was picturing thousands of tubes that would have to be changed out constantly. Five was actually a bold estimate, it’s like saying “only 5 space elevators” today.
Also, that’s not actually a response to what I said. It’s just another anecdote about someone being wrong once.
True, I thought the response could be inferred. What I meant to say is that you can’t make proper predictions with any degree of certainty about future developments with the scopes of current knowledge. Like superconductors for computers, someone could invent something equivalent to a quantum superconductor which would propel the advancement of quantum computers forward by decades.
Meeting that description would be a material with fractional-spin quasiparticals, and yeah, building a quantum computer would be easy with those. Otherwise, it seems likely we’ll get them in the 30’s, or maybe even late this decade.
That’s not the issue, though. There might well be no helpful algorithms that exist for the thing, outside of research applications like simulating quantum systems. It could only ever be the next big thing for certain scientists unless that fundamentally changes. You’re right, I can’t say for certain that it won’t, but it’s not a good guess.
Broken encryption might be the next big thing, but that’s actually a negative. In my response I put down post-quantum cryptography as a possibility, just based on how I interpret the question.
Maybe useless to you. I’ll definitely find use for it. And cracking encryption is a huge plus. Quantum computers have been around for a long time and in use there are all sorts of software and even special OS for it just not for public use for obvious reasons.
Bro, do you even know a Kronecker product from a discrete log? You’ll find a use my ass. And now you’re in with a super secret group of quantum computer users. Are you sending ninjas after me next?
Looking at the U.S. political situation, fascism seems to be getting closer every day.
In fact, if you look at a lot of other western nations, fascist ideas are springing up all over.
If feels like the world is even more crazy than it used to be, and the current period of crazy started in 2016 with Brexit, then Trumps win snd presidency, rolling into covid, then Trump got ejected, Russia intencified the war in Ukraine, the Hamas shat the bed and now Israel is going batshit insane, oh and during the two last years, two social media sites have decided to just oblitirate most of their good content generators, X is just fucking over everything that was twitter, and Reddit is slowly imploding since the apicalypse.
I just had a look on Wikipedia, and damn there has been a LOT of shit going down since the start of 2016…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Brussels_bombings
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Papers
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse_nightclub_shooting
en.wikipedia.org/…/2016_United_Kingdom_European_U…
en.wikipedia.org/…/2016_Atatürk_Airport_attack
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Nice_truck_attack
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Turkish_coup_attempt
en.wikipedia.org/…/2016_United_States_presidentia…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Berlin_truck_attack
2017:
en.wikipedia.org/…/Istanbul_nightclub_shooting
en.wikipedia.org/…/2017_Jerusalem_truck_attack
en.wikipedia.org/…/Assassination_of_Kim_Jong-nam
en.wikipedia.org/…/March_2017_North_American_bliz…
en.wikipedia.org/…/2017_storming_of_the_Macedonia…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WannaCry_ransomware_attack
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Arena_bombing
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_London_Bridge_attack
The ‘funny’ thing is that Trump never had won. He gained fewer votes than Hillary in 2016…
Via the popular vote, yes. But in the US, the popular vote doesn’t decide anything. Should it? That’s a different question. The point is they won the election legitimately.
We have work to do, but peddling election denial misinformation isn’t it.
You saying this has the same practical significance as pro-Trump people who think Biden “didn’t really win” in 2020.
Which is to say zero.
Difference is that my saying is based on a historically vested principle, simple as: one man, one vote. Instead of: your vote doesn’t count, only the oligarch’s does.
They did win because of how the electoral college works. Both Trump and Bush lost the popular vote and won the election because the system is designed in a stupid way.
jkozakaDon’t forget Europe. Here, the far right is also racially motivated. My country’s (Portugal) far right party shot up in votes in the last election and has repeatedly villanized roma people.
I hear the AfD is also pretty concerning.
Che BananaSpain is a minority led liberal government because of all the gains the far right has made.
The election of Trump in 2016 was the culmination of many factors from the previous 50 years, all of which lead to a very predictable outcome.
- Reaganomics loosening regulation on corporations, lowering taxes on the wealthy, and defunding public education
- Rush Limbaugh and Fox news fostering rural nationalism
- the advent of the internet which allowed those people to find each other and exchange their poorly informed ideas
- the perception that politicians were prioritizing “them” over "real Americans"
- 9/11 and the resulting surveillance state and 24h sensationalist news cycle.
By the time Obama was in office, Republicans and Democrats lived in different realities. Republicans just wanted someone who was willing to stand on stage and spout their version of reality, and Trump is the right combination of insecure and stupid to want to do that. He was an inevitable symptom of a decades long problem.
DeltaTangoLimaIt should be climate action. Not saying it will be - just that it should be.
There is a massive climate catastrophe before there is another even bigger climate catastrophe before considering climate action.
Unfortunately, the “climate action” will be massive scale climate based migration from folks fleeing drought or rising oceans.
vext01Flared trouser biosuits?
Drone warfare.
WeAreAllOnePush for digital IDs and CBDCs…