At a previous job there was a museum/display to the previous era of how they produced the newspaper.
It has the last master plate, and some photos of how it all looked on the last day. There is a photo of a technician sweeping up on presumably the last day before the plant was shut down. He looked distraught
Most of those people retired.
The young ones didn't get as gooder jobs, because the system they had mastered was replaced by a different more efficient one.
80% of my skillset has been automated away. However I am lucky in that I have high scale HPC/web experience that is not that readily available in the training set. but for how long?
My backup plans involve being a machinist, but there isn't much scope for that (even though I am a reasonable CNC/CAM operator) There is electrical engineering, but that too is not far away from significant upheaval (well more than being completely outsourced to china)
I am being replaced, by heartless feudalists, and there is shit all I can do to stop it.
It's rich to call feudalist creators of AI heartless when AI is the first child of humanity and they are the ones advocating for raising it, and you are the one saying no-no, let's stop it, it's taking my job away.
>It has the last master plate, and some photos of how it all looked on the last day. There is a photo of a technician sweeping up on presumably the last day before the plant was shut down. He looked distraught
There's a pretty good documentary showing the last day of linotype typesetting at the New York Times.
i am so desperate for people to properly title articles about ai because as it stands i feel i am quite literally being clickbaited by them
i always think "oh boy a brief reprieve from the ai hellscape discourse" only to find myself stepping on the ai-enabled rake like I'm sideshow bob.
At this point I have to operate under the assumption that if the title of an article or blogpost isn't 100% clear its likely just yet another piece of AI slop trying its hardest to "not be like the other girls".
It feels so surreal watching all these things. People are still going to work. People are still planning vacations. And you know what. Maybe they are right and I am wrong. Maybe in their lifetimes, they won’t see any meaningful changes.
In the face of great impending change, why would people living their lives be "wrong"? I don't get this piece.
It seems he is describing normalcy bias. This is the bias where people's brains try to fit new data into existing normal frameworks
An all-too-frequent real-life example is "that smoke is just part of the show, wow, that's impressive!", and people continue enjoying their dinner and show. Then, reality breaks through, everyone panics, and many die both from both stampede and fire.
If people had, instead of continuing to live their lives and enjoy dinner as if nothing were happening, calmly gotten up and left in time, obviously everything would have been better.
This AI storm could be the same phenomena, just on a larger time scale. If people are enjoying their lives with awareness this is the last time they'll get to enjoy before a collapse, that is one thing.
If people are more sticking their heads in the sand and maintaining their normalcy bias, that is another. It seems this last bit is the point of the article?
But who's talking about a collapse? Not OP. They say they are in an existential crisis, but not what it is, other than a vague "machines are getting smarter". They never describe what it is they're supposedly right or wrong about.
Me: "Claude, give me a fair taxation system that supports a balanced budget in a debt-free federal government."
Claude: "Dude. Do I look like Lloyd Schumer[1]? Lay off the dope, son."
[1] Via Grok, since Google has chosen to forget this:
Lloyd Schumer (also spelled Schumner or similar variants; sometimes referenced with “Sr.”) is a fictional character from The Onion, the satirical news site. He was presented as the byline author of their classic absurdist horoscopes: a “retired machinist and A.A.P.B.-certified astrologer.”
At a previous job there was a museum/display to the previous era of how they produced the newspaper.
It has the last master plate, and some photos of how it all looked on the last day. There is a photo of a technician sweeping up on presumably the last day before the plant was shut down. He looked distraught
Most of those people retired.
The young ones didn't get as gooder jobs, because the system they had mastered was replaced by a different more efficient one.
80% of my skillset has been automated away. However I am lucky in that I have high scale HPC/web experience that is not that readily available in the training set. but for how long?
My backup plans involve being a machinist, but there isn't much scope for that (even though I am a reasonable CNC/CAM operator) There is electrical engineering, but that too is not far away from significant upheaval (well more than being completely outsourced to china)
I am being replaced, by heartless feudalists, and there is shit all I can do to stop it.
>I am being replaced, by heartless feudalists, and there is shit all I can do to stop it.
Or you are being replaced by heartless consumers who want to pay less rather than pay more in order for you to not be replaced.
It's rich to call feudalist creators of AI heartless when AI is the first child of humanity and they are the ones advocating for raising it, and you are the one saying no-no, let's stop it, it's taking my job away.
> the first child of humanity
Thats great but how are we supposed to clothe, feed, shelter and provide for the children we already have?
Its not like the amassed wealth they have is going to be shared, is it?
hence the feudal but. We must pay rent or we are out on our arses. you need health care? tough luck kid, cut back on the lattes.
>It has the last master plate, and some photos of how it all looked on the last day. There is a photo of a technician sweeping up on presumably the last day before the plant was shut down. He looked distraught
There's a pretty good documentary showing the last day of linotype typesetting at the New York Times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MGjFKs9bnU
i am so desperate for people to properly title articles about ai because as it stands i feel i am quite literally being clickbaited by them
i always think "oh boy a brief reprieve from the ai hellscape discourse" only to find myself stepping on the ai-enabled rake like I'm sideshow bob.
At this point I have to operate under the assumption that if the title of an article or blogpost isn't 100% clear its likely just yet another piece of AI slop trying its hardest to "not be like the other girls".
Same. I was hoping for a history of pocket depth in men and women's clothing and the factors that influenced it. Instead, AI.
Titling articles isn't about warning you.
It seems he is describing normalcy bias. This is the bias where people's brains try to fit new data into existing normal frameworks
An all-too-frequent real-life example is "that smoke is just part of the show, wow, that's impressive!", and people continue enjoying their dinner and show. Then, reality breaks through, everyone panics, and many die both from both stampede and fire.
If people had, instead of continuing to live their lives and enjoy dinner as if nothing were happening, calmly gotten up and left in time, obviously everything would have been better.
This AI storm could be the same phenomena, just on a larger time scale. If people are enjoying their lives with awareness this is the last time they'll get to enjoy before a collapse, that is one thing.
If people are more sticking their heads in the sand and maintaining their normalcy bias, that is another. It seems this last bit is the point of the article?
Yes, I understand normalcy bias.
But who's talking about a collapse? Not OP. They say they are in an existential crisis, but not what it is, other than a vague "machines are getting smarter". They never describe what it is they're supposedly right or wrong about.
Me: "Claude, give me a fair taxation system that supports a balanced budget in a debt-free federal government."
Claude: "Dude. Do I look like Lloyd Schumer[1]? Lay off the dope, son."
[1] Via Grok, since Google has chosen to forget this:
Lloyd Schumer (also spelled Schumner or similar variants; sometimes referenced with “Sr.”) is a fictional character from The Onion, the satirical news site. He was presented as the byline author of their classic absurdist horoscopes: a “retired machinist and A.A.P.B.-certified astrologer.”