America wants AI that doesn't care about misinformation, DEI, and climate change
Technology
165
Beiträge
58
Kommentatoren
3.9k
Aufrufe
-
The Trump administration recently published "America's AI Action Plan". One of the first policy actions from the document is to eliminate references to misinformation, diversity, equity, inclusion, and climate change from the NIST's AI Risk Framework.
Lacking any sense of irony, the very next point states LLM developers should ensure their systems are "objective and free from top-down ideological bias".
Par for the course for Trump and his cronies, but the world should know what kind of AI the US wants to build.
Again, AMERICA doesn't want this. This is some dumb shit from a mentally deficient and decrepit old man that somehow got elected under very shady terms by a minority of the country.
-
Again, AMERICA doesn't want this. This is some dumb shit from a mentally deficient and decrepit old man that somehow got elected under very shady terms by a minority of the country.
What matters more? What AMERICA wants, or what the administration enacts in to policy? You're missing the point if you're arguing about my phrasing.
-
What matters more? What AMERICA wants, or what the administration enacts in to policy? You're missing the point if you're arguing about my phrasing.
The phrasing means everything.
Example: "Trump wants..."
VS
Example: "America wants..."
Big difference. Executive Orders are a memo, not law. It's disturbing that I have to keep saying this and explaining this.
-
The only solace I find in this is that AI, and AGI specifically, is probably a massive grift that will crash spectacularly at some point.
Like crypto?
-
What matters more? What AMERICA wants, or what the administration enacts in to policy? You're missing the point if you're arguing about my phrasing.
That...what???
No, your choice of phrasing conveys your message.
If you're argument is not against the American people, but rather the administration, then your wording is, well, wrong.
-
The phrasing means everything.
Example: "Trump wants..."
VS
Example: "America wants..."
Big difference. Executive Orders are a memo, not law. It's disturbing that I have to keep saying this and explaining this.
I did not use the word "law". So you're arguing that EO's have no actual effect? That is blatantly false: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trumps-dei-purge-is-hitting-nasa-hard/
-
That...what???
No, your choice of phrasing conveys your message.
If you're argument is not against the American people, but rather the administration, then your wording is, well, wrong.
You’re missing the point if you’re arguing about my phrasing.
-
You’re missing the point if you’re arguing about my phrasing.
No. You're dodging the argument. You chose to phrase it that way. And pretending that's just some incidental thing with no meaning honestly is about the dumbest response I've seen in a while.
You have made the argument that it is the American people, not the administration. You. Not anybody else.
-
Like crypto?
Very similar to crypto, the AI hype is sustained by some future promise that never comes true.
-
The Trump administration recently published "America's AI Action Plan". One of the first policy actions from the document is to eliminate references to misinformation, diversity, equity, inclusion, and climate change from the NIST's AI Risk Framework.
Lacking any sense of irony, the very next point states LLM developers should ensure their systems are "objective and free from top-down ideological bias".
Par for the course for Trump and his cronies, but the world should know what kind of AI the US wants to build.
Good luck enforcing open source AI.
-
No. You're dodging the argument. You chose to phrase it that way. And pretending that's just some incidental thing with no meaning honestly is about the dumbest response I've seen in a while.
You have made the argument that it is the American people, not the administration. You. Not anybody else.
I did not use the phrase "the American people".
-
Good luck enforcing open source AI.
Do you think that regulations have no effect on open source AI?
-
The Trump administration recently published "America's AI Action Plan". One of the first policy actions from the document is to eliminate references to misinformation, diversity, equity, inclusion, and climate change from the NIST's AI Risk Framework.
Lacking any sense of irony, the very next point states LLM developers should ensure their systems are "objective and free from top-down ideological bias".
Par for the course for Trump and his cronies, but the world should know what kind of AI the US wants to build.
This is going to be catastrophic. Imagine the government using AI that does not factor that waters will rise and things will get more humid when deciding to build houses or bridges only for them to be underwater.
-
I did not use the word "law". So you're arguing that EO's have no actual effect? That is blatantly false: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trumps-dei-purge-is-hitting-nasa-hard/
Executive orders only affect federal agencies. If they were laws, we'd all be arrested.
-
I did not use the phrase "the American people".
Wow.
Just...wow.
You honestly think that's an argument?!?
Goodbye
-
Wow.
Just...wow.
You honestly think that's an argument?!?
Goodbye
Based on your post history, I think we're on the same side. I understand that this administration does not represent all of America. Unfortunately though, the semantics of it all don't really matter. Trump got the majority vote, and that's what matters. The effects of his policies matter. From the perspective of the rest of the world, this is what (the majority of) America has chosen. I don't like it either.
-
Do you think that regulations have no effect on open source AI?
In this case? Yeah. There will always be someone with a copy of the code. They just spin up a new model and share it with the world. It's like The Pirate Bay. No matter how hard they try to destroy the site, it always comes back.
-
In this case? Yeah. There will always be someone with a copy of the code. They just spin up a new model and share it with the world. It's like The Pirate Bay. No matter how hard they try to destroy the site, it always comes back.
I think the bipartisan TAKE IT DOWN bill has and will have a substantial effect on the proliferation of open source deepfake models. Sure, a tech savvy individual will still be able to download a model themselves and do whatever, but it significantly different from having deepfake services readily available for millions to use. Is it absolute enforcement, no, but it has a substantial effect on the world.
-
I did not use the word "law". So you're arguing that EO's have no actual effect? That is blatantly false: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trumps-dei-purge-is-hitting-nasa-hard/
I'm arguing that you're intentionally trying to play semantics with phrasing and claim it doesn't matter, when it absolutely does, and everyone in here is explaining to you why. That's all.
-
I think the bipartisan TAKE IT DOWN bill has and will have a substantial effect on the proliferation of open source deepfake models. Sure, a tech savvy individual will still be able to download a model themselves and do whatever, but it significantly different from having deepfake services readily available for millions to use. Is it absolute enforcement, no, but it has a substantial effect on the world.
How did we get to talking about deepfakes? They're trying to stop honest discussions about misinformation, diversity, equity, inclusion, and climate change.
