BrianKrebsNov 3

In two recent public speaking engagements, I made a comparison between the obesity epidemic in various pockets of the globe and AI. Several people came up afterwards and said that was the best analogy they'd heard, so maybe it's worth repeating here. Also, I feel like this one will hold up a while.

What I said was some recent CDC figures show that something like 55 percent of the average American diet comes from processed or highly processed "foods," and the numbers are even higher for kids. In a similar way, so much of what AI produces is akin to highly processed data: Its myriad origins are murky at best, you often don't feel great after using it a while, and if you are exposed to it too much it might just freaking kill you.

Show threadJoe BrockmeierNov 3
@briankrebs For the love of goodness, *please* do not go there. There are far too many people looking for any opportunity to lecture others on their diet, exercise, and so forth.
Show threadBrianKrebsNov 3
@jzb I think our extreme reliance on processed food is a debate that is very much worth having. And it's inextricable from a very real and pressing public health issue that deserves a great deal more sunshine.
Show threadJoe Brockmeier

@briankrebs Because... nobody knows that they need to lose weight? I don't think so. There is no debate to be had -- people *know* and there are *so* many issues at play, you are seriously muddying the waters and distracting from whatever point you might want to make around AI.

We all *have* to eat, and often people have less control than you might think about what they choose to eat. We do not all have to adopt AI. Again: this just gives a number of scolds an opportunity to climb on their favorite soapbox and lecture people.

Nov 3 at 8:09pmWeb
Show threadBrianKrebsNov 3
@jzb okay. thanks for the feedback!
Show threadBen PettisNov 4
@objectionodon
Show threadObjectionodonNov 4

OBJECTION!

Your video is now ready.

@jzb @briankrebs

Don't want to see these posts? You can add @objectionodon to your ignore list. DM @objectionodon if you'd like your posts to be excluded from any animations.

Show threadskryNov 4

@briankrebs @jzb IMO the third rail of fatshaming can be avoided easily while keeping the analogy by not using the word “obesity” and its ilk, but rather talking about the dismal American diet.

Whether it makes us fat or not is beside the point. It’s high-calorie, low-nutrition, quantity over quality.

Also, both low-qual food and low-qual genslop are shiny, ubiquitous, and super-available to people with low resources and skills. Worse than free, vigorously promoted.

Show threadLevkaNov 3

@jzb @briankrebs

"This just gives a number of scolds an opportunity to climb on their favorite soapbox and lecture people", says a local scold on their favorite soapbox, lecturing us all in the guise of lecturing Brian.

It brings to mind a certain rebuttal, "If you don't like the act, finish your drink, burn your cross, and go home." -- Lenny Bruce

Show threadHana AianhanmaNov 4

@jzb @briankrebs Apparently, people still don't know they are up against an obesogenic envionment?

Which, for me, would be the point of the comparison. Not to blame people for their so-called choice to eat ultra processed foods, but to emphasise that our data is being hijacked by a trillion dollar industry that does not have our mental health as a priority.

Show threadHey GusNov 4

@jzb @briankrebs

Sure, just like we have a choice in having or not having a smart phone.

You can chose not to but that is completely unrealistic if you’re living as part of society. Metro passes/payment, parking, access to buildings, banking, identification.

On top of that you have even less choice of not using AI as it’s just being used for plenty of parts of the infra we are both using right now.

Show threadBrianKrebsNov 4
@elebertus @jzb Yup. AI is also being used to summarize the news in misleading ways almost half the time. Or summarize your search results in a really unhelpful or dangerous way.
Show threadHey GusNov 4

@briankrebs @jzb agreed, and a non-zero amount of time when you do investigate the cited sources it doesn’t even make sense.

As in the LLM reports X is adversarial with Y, but really X and Y are allied against G and P.