Mastodawn

Google CEO tries to tell University students to love AI. They tell him to BOO off.

It is good to see kids are saying no and fighting back. Do you know why? Because the future of bots, AI and robots doesn't offer any jobs to these young kids. They know greedy AI companies want to get rid of working class. It is simple as that.

For those who wish to read instead of the clip. See BBC page: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce8pqd54qneo

#ai #llm

Show thread

nixCraft 🐧3d ago

AI leaders like him and their AI companies are highly speculative and profit from that speculation in billions each yeer, while ordinary people like us and the kids in this video who boo and make similar speculations are called alarmists or Luddites.

Show thread

datatofu 3d ago

@nixCraft Equivocation fallacy detected.

> In finance, an asset is "speculative" if its value is based on potential future price movements rather than current cash flow or intrinsic utility.

> In a debate about AI or technology, "speculative" refers to conjecture or reasoning based on hypothetical scenarios that have not happened and have no data to support them yet.

An investment perspective and a Luddite perspective are not the same

Show thread

Tired Bunny

3d ago

@drmorrisj @nixCraft

> value is based on potential future price movements rather than current cash flow or intrinsic utility.

Pretty much fits a lot of concerns about AI too. Investments into it are mostly based on idea that it will soon become profitable to the point of badly damaging companies who didn't invest into it. While currently, AI is too costly to be profitable and too unreliable and produces low quality output to talk about intrinsic utility.

So called Luddites don't care much about whether this investment will fail or not, but they are savvy enough to see why this investment happens and call it speculative in business sense too.

Show thread

datatofu 3d ago

@tiredbun @nixCraft so... is this an attempt to justify the fallacy or are you making a new one? I can not tell.

Using one to justify the other is like saying you should not buy a lottery ticket (financial speculation) because you are afraid of ghosts (theoretical speculation).

Show thread

Tired Bunny

3d ago

@drmorrisj @nixCraft

I just think that trying to make distinction is useless, because the way AI companies earn money is with more investments because of overvalued investments and promises, which is another form of investment speculation, and the way people suffer for it isn't any speculation at all. When people say value of AI companies is speculative, they mean in that sense too.

Show thread

Tired Bunny

@drmorrisj

My idea is, phrasing it like your example - you should not invest into company that is based on promises of ghosts. So called luddites are more concerned with that company is killing people, but they also will be angry that promised ghosts are theoretical speculation, and that investors are going in because of promises and blankets made to look like ghosts.

If that doesn't exactly fit a specific domain-specific definition of speculation and you technically wrong for calling investitions speculative, that doesn't really matter for the point. Maybe not ideal phrasing on the side of @nixCraft, but it's not really a fallacy.