Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Reality, The Universe and the World. Which will save us from AI?

Reality
- 15 (68.2%)
Universe
- 4 (18.2%)
The World
- 3 (13.6%)

Total Members Voted: 22


Pages: 1 ... 51 52 [53] 54 55 ... 57

Author Topic: What will save us from AI? Reality, the Universe or The World $ Place your bet.  (Read 60102 times)

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

"Learn while running" gets you Tay, though.

Or WOPR/Joshua. Though, yes, that turned out Ok, eventually, as maybe did Skynet...
Logged

King Zultan

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

I can't wait for the part where they get the learning while running working and it turns into skynet that's also a Nazi.
Logged
The Lawyer opens a briefcase. It's full of lemons, the justice fruit only lawyers may touch.
Make sure not to step on any errant blood stains before we find our LIFE EXTINGUSHER.
but anyway, if you'll excuse me, I need to commit sebbaku.
Quote from: Leodanny
Can I have the sword when you’re done?

lemon10

  • Bay Watcher
  • Citrus Master
    • View Profile

It looks like Trump might slap massive 25-100% tarrifs on TSMC's chips. (Note they make the Nvidia chips). Which like a lot of other stuff Trump is doing right now is completely fucking crazy.

I guess that's one way to delay AI progress (good) at the expense of carpet bombing the economy (bad).

Hopefully its just a negotiation tactic.
Logged
And with a mighty leap, the evil Conservative flies through the window, escaping our heroes once again!
Because the solution to not being able to control your dakka is MOAR DAKKA.

That's it. We've finally crossed over and become the nation of Da Orky Boyz.

martinuzz

  • Bay Watcher
  • High dwarf
    • View Profile

Google announced it will get rid of it's policy to only use AI for peaceful purposes. They will allow it to be used for war now.
Logged
Friendly and polite reminder for optimists: Hope is a finite resource

We can ­disagree and still love each other, ­unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist - James Baldwin

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=73719.msg1830479#msg1830479

EuchreJack

  • Bay Watcher
  • Lord of Norderland - Lv 20 SKOOKUM ROC
    • View Profile

Google announced it will get rid of it's policy to only use AI for peaceful purposes. They will allow it to be used for war now.
That is in line with their policy of no longer having the policy of "don't do evil'.

martinuzz

  • Bay Watcher
  • High dwarf
    • View Profile

I'm not sure how to feel about this.
Thomson Reuters just won a lawsuit versus Ross intelligence for copyright infringement. Ross developed an AI model that can assist lawyers in finding jurisprudence cases.
The AI used Reuters' (paid subscsription) database of laws and verdicts, Westlaw, which is owned by Reuters.
The judge ruled that there is no grounds to claim 'fair use', because Ross is direct competition for Westlaw.

On one hand, I think it's good that we be very mindful of copyright and privacy issues when training AI.

But hiding a database of laws and verdicts behind a paywall? How do you ever expect your citizens to know the law then? (We have an actual law that says: 'Each Dutch citizen is expected to know the law'. I know, I know, it makes judges and lawyers look pretty redundant and silly.)
Logged
Friendly and polite reminder for optimists: Hope is a finite resource

We can ­disagree and still love each other, ­unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist - James Baldwin

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=73719.msg1830479#msg1830479

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

(We have an actual law that says: 'Each Dutch citizen is expected to know the law'. I know, I know, it makes judges and lawyers look pretty redundant and silly.)
Is this supposed, perhaps, to be equivent to ignorantia juris non excusat? i.e. that you cannot claim innocence by not knowing that your crime was a crime. (Though if it can be shown that it would be unreasonable to have known, it might get you some drastic mitigation in sentencing, depending upon many other factors.)

Though encyclopedic knowledge of case-law is the province of the people that get paid for it (and that seems to be where Westlaw and Ross (and lawyers in general!) are competing), the core statutes from which the merits of the cases get interpreted remain open-access (at least in theory, however impenetrable the words are) Though these are perhaps less useful as AI training material, as you need to build up associations like "nine times out of ten, an appeal with <certain considerations> will succeed", etc, which is like an AI reviewing many chess matches, rather than merely trying to parse the single set of rules and regulations that define how any particular match might happen.

It also sounds very much like going into an all-you-can-eat buffet (presuming the Westlaw subscription allowed unlimited access to as much information as the legally-curious might wish) but instead of gorging oneself, opening the window and passing as much as was available out to be served at pop-up street cafe. At the very least, going against the spirit of the original access (which, for even a non-AI version of the scheme, would amount to unauthorised and prohibited subscription-sharing), probably also breaking further seperate regulations (equivalent to not ensuring allergy information and anti-allergy segregation is maintained, plus other hygene precautions such as making sure nothing sits around too long, raw salads and cooked meat being kept in close proximity, etc) by representing an unqualified 'legalBot' output to be just as accurately curated and presented as the original material which was courtesy of at least some level of actual legal training.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2025, 07:29:01 am by Starver »
Logged

martinuzz

  • Bay Watcher
  • High dwarf
    • View Profile

(We have an actual law that says: 'Each Dutch citizen is expected to know the law'. I know, I know, it makes judges and lawyers look pretty redundant and silly.)
Is this supposed, perhaps, to be equivent to ignorantia juris non excusat? i.e. that you cannot claim innocence by not knowing that your crime was a crime. (Though if it can be shown that it would be unreasonable to have known, it might get you some drastic mitigation in sentencing, depending upon many other factors.)
Indeed it is.
I am not sure if it has the exact same limitation, or that it is in some cases possible even to be found innocent, when a law you broke is so obscure or bureaucratically hidden that you couldn't possibly have been aware that you broke a law. We aren't true Vogons yet but that is not because of the bureaucracy. We just don't have lethal poetry yet, except for those trying to pronounce it.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2025, 07:35:18 am by martinuzz »
Logged
Friendly and polite reminder for optimists: Hope is a finite resource

We can ­disagree and still love each other, ­unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist - James Baldwin

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=73719.msg1830479#msg1830479

Strongpoint

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Oh... this decision will be so annoying with every anti-AI person anywhere using it as a precedent when it is not a generative AI but a search engine that presents copies to a user, not a new work.

Quote
But hiding a database of laws and verdicts behind a paywall? 
Laws and verdicts aren't copyrightable.

But It is not a database of laws and verdicts, it is a database of short summaries of laws and verdicts. That summary part is copyrightable, author decides what to keep in the summary. Derivative from not copyrightable content may be copyrightable.
Logged
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. Boom!!! Sooner or later.

McTraveller

  • Bay Watcher
  • This text isn't very personal.
    • View Profile

I wonder what the equivalent of alcohol would be for AI.
Logged
This product contains deoxyribonucleic acid which is known to the State of California to cause cancer, reproductive harm, and other health issues.

Strongpoint

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

I wonder what the equivalent of alcohol would be for AI.

Cat videos!
Logged
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. Boom!!! Sooner or later.

martinuzz

  • Bay Watcher
  • High dwarf
    • View Profile

I wonder what the equivalent of alcohol would be for AI.
Windows updates
Logged
Friendly and polite reminder for optimists: Hope is a finite resource

We can ­disagree and still love each other, ­unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist - James Baldwin

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=73719.msg1830479#msg1830479

EuchreJack

  • Bay Watcher
  • Lord of Norderland - Lv 20 SKOOKUM ROC
    • View Profile

I'm not sure how to feel about this.
Thomson Reuters just won a lawsuit versus Ross intelligence for copyright infringement. Ross developed an AI model that can assist lawyers in finding jurisprudence cases.
The AI used Reuters' (paid subscsription) database of laws and verdicts, Westlaw, which is owned by Reuters.
The judge ruled that there is no grounds to claim 'fair use', because Ross is direct competition for Westlaw.

On one hand, I think it's good that we be very mindful of copyright and privacy issues when training AI.

But hiding a database of laws and verdicts behind a paywall? How do you ever expect your citizens to know the law then? (We have an actual law that says: 'Each Dutch citizen is expected to know the law'. I know, I know, it makes judges and lawyers look pretty redundant and silly.)

Ironically, the alternative is worse:

Recall, that the United States is based upon the basic principle that everything should be done as cheaply as possible.

Remember, that the United States requires all criminal defendants be appointed government funded lawyers unless they choose otherwise.

Rationalize, that an AI model that can assist lawyers in finding jurisprudence cases could be repurposed to allow criminal defendants to represent themselves.

Realize, that AI assisted criminal defendants are infinitely cheaper than government funded lawyers.

Throw in a few Judges and State Governments that are willing to push on criminal defendants to choose the cheap iPad that tells them the law over the expensive attorney that genuinely assists them in not going to jail...

...and you have a draconian society that has further pushed us 100+ years into the past.

EuchreJack

  • Bay Watcher
  • Lord of Norderland - Lv 20 SKOOKUM ROC
    • View Profile

I'm starting to think the Exodii techno-barbarians in Cataclysm: DDA are coming from our own future instead of any other alternative timeline...

King Zultan

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

I don't think we're quite near that level yet but if we keep shoving AI into crap that doesn't need it we probably will be.

Also I'd really like to play that game again but I can't because it's looking like I need a new keyboard.
Logged
The Lawyer opens a briefcase. It's full of lemons, the justice fruit only lawyers may touch.
Make sure not to step on any errant blood stains before we find our LIFE EXTINGUSHER.
but anyway, if you'll excuse me, I need to commit sebbaku.
Quote from: Leodanny
Can I have the sword when you’re done?
Pages: 1 ... 51 52 [53] 54 55 ... 57