The next time someone tells you some tech is "inevitable" please laugh directly in their face. And then tell them that's been used as an excuse for exploitation forever, it's a red flag, and if they were smart, they'd avoid it, well, like the plague. But we know how well that's going.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.08778

@davidthewid @histoftech

Watching the Generative AI Hype Bubble Deflate

Only a few short months ago, Generative AI was sold to us as inevitable by the leadership of AI companies, those who partnered with them, and venture capitalists. As certain elements of the media promoted and amplified these claims, public discourse online buzzed with what each new beta release could be made to do with a few simple prompts. As AI became a viral sensation, every business tried to become an AI business. Some businesses added "AI" to their names to juice their stock prices, and companies talking about "AI" on their earnings calls saw similar increases. While the Generative AI hype bubble is now slowly deflating, its harmful effects will last.

arXiv.org
Covid still high, mpox emergency, and parvovirus enters the chat

State of Affairs: August 20

Your Local Epidemiologist
@susankayequinn Thanks for engaging with our work!

@davidthewid Ah, you're here on Mastodon! I will tag you — and thanks for doing the work!

(Doh! you posted the original thing I shared — need more tea this morning)

@susankayequinn @davidthewid @histoftech Is the GenAI bubble deflating, though? I would love it if that was the case, but all I see is more and more push for it from big tech, and all the hobbyists lapping it up.

@ticho @susankayequinn @histoftech

We purposely didn't call it a pop, because it's a slower process, but I do think the hype is deflating. There's some pointers to why we think that's the case in the piece, notably the business types becoming increasingly skeptical.

@davidthewid I like your distinction: previous rejection of tech has been the public saying "meh" (to the metaverse) whereas genAI is an active rejection--by the people getting their data scraped, by companies positioning themselves as using "real humans". The gold rush was more intense on this but the backlash was equally intense. And growing.

I'm very happy to see that, being determined from the outset to use social rejection on this tech built on theft & made of crimes

@ticho @histoftech

@davidthewid @ticho @histoftech

And also this: "A key question remains for which we may never have a satisfactory answer: what if the hype was always meant to fail? What if the point was to hype things up, get in, make a profit, and entrench infrastructure dependencies before critique, or reality, had a chance to catch up?"

We need to wise up to the exploitation/extraction our economic model is based on and how that's simply not sustainable in the #ClimateCrisis

@susankayequinn @davidthewid @histoftech Primarily we as a civilization need to figure out how to process all those oodles of information that come at us from all directions, and learn how to discard those which are intended to disinform and manipulate.

That, to me, is the central issue behind most contemporary problems, including these hype market bubbles.

@ticho while I don't want to minimize the impact of the info/disinfo firehose, I don't see that as the source of problem. The firehose is an intentional tool used by companies for exploitation/extraction purposes (and overconsumption driving the climate crisis). No matter how much I'm able to tell BS from good info, AI was still shoved into everything. The firehose just makes it easier to obsfuscate. Get savvy, yes, but we have to change how the entire economy works.

@davidthewid @histoftech

@susankayequinn @davidthewid @ticho @histoftech This is very much what's going on.

Delighted to see @histoftech 's name on the paper too! I've long been a fan of their work.

@davidthewid @susankayequinn @histoftech Fair enough, thank you. I think I recall some such signals from recent weeks, but very sparsely so far. Maybe that's why I asked my question. :)
@susankayequinn @davidthewid Yeah they ruined the internet so there is that. I know you're all upset about computers using electricity, but your children will be mad about that. The garbage the fake computer minds have spewed across every corner of the web and every book. Search results are trash. You can't even use them anymore because it's all just AI garbled garbage telling people to drink paint.
We gave them the library of Alexandria in the palm of their hands and then burned it to the ground in months.
They can't even train new ones anymore because you can't train LLM off their own garbage.
Every one they make will just further damage the internet and books. Every one they make will be dumber than the one before it, because it's drinking its own piss.
What I'm trying to put in the words, and what you probably won't come to truly understand in your lifetimes, is that what these things have done is take the vast archives of all human knowledge and retarded them.
Both the internet and our collection of books because the same broken minds that have astroturfed gibberish frosted garbage across the web
The same thing has been done to the written word and archives as well, as they spammed out nonsensical books.
They have done incalculable damage to human knowledge both online and off.
I use these words because there are no other words, but you know. Feel free to PC check the end of human civilization if you've really got that much time on your hands over there.
@susankayequinn @davidthewid @histoftech Don't get me wrong; I'm very much in the "enough with the snake oil" camp re: generative AI, but can't carbon be "put back into the ground" through sequestration? Is that a lie, too? Not trying to stir the pot here, just honestly curious if it's just another farce like plastic recycling.

@haliphax there are a lot of lies in carbon sequestration, mixed with some real technologies with promise. Almost universally "leave it in the ground" is much much MUCH better. The idea that it's okay to burn because we can "put it back in the ground" is almost universally a justification for burning.

The one good tech: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/iceland-carbon-capture-project-quickly-converts-carbon-dioxide-stone-180959365/

Simple truth: all the carbon being burned for AI *will not* be put back in the ground anytime soon.

@davidthewid @histoftech

Iceland Carbon Capture Project Quickly Converts Carbon Dioxide Into Stone

More than 95 percent of gas injected into the ground precipitated out as harmless carbonate, scientists calculate

Smithsonian Magazine
@susankayequinn Thank you for the explanation and the link! 🙇

@susankayequinn @davidthewid @histoftech Hmmm, I guess I'll have to put "AI" in the cold-cases box with the metaverse, defi, code-is-law, hyperloop, self-driving cars, etc.

Mars is probably next.

@susankayequinn @davidthewid @histoftech

I will wait until the money people pass from skepticism to outright panic, but already have this gif for the occasion 😂