Show newer

AI and sentience; Sorry, I'm still on about this 

To sum up, AI needs to be regulated for:

* Enclosure of the digital commons
* De facto colonial torture of human curators of training corpuses
* Environmental impact

The following are just intentional distractions:

* AI sentience and welfare
* AI superintelligence

Show thread

prediction, funding, AI, re: google antitrust case, mozilla 

@kescher Actually, let's try to predict the sequence of events in more detail, and I'm curious how close I'll end up being:

Mozilla will do a desperate funding drive, not just asking for donations, but also internally ask around to find investors in their own network. Nobody is willing to invest enough money for activist reasons to keep it afloat. Because of the entrenched structure of the organization, they cannot make it work with smaller offers of investments.

Eventually, a 'friendly' investor shows up who just so happens to be invested in an AI company. The AI company runs a proprietary cloud service, sure, but they've been looking to do better and go against the grain of the industry, and so they wish to partner with Mozilla, on the premise that Mozilla's ethical AI efforts are a good starting point for renewing their product to go in a more ethical direction.

However, their stakeholders need to be kept happy too, so in the short term, they would like for Mozilla to expand their AI offerings with something that integrates with their proprietary, hosted offerings. It will be optional, of course, and it would have a data protection agreement, and wouldn't it be good for the users too? After all, some AI models are just Too Hard to run locally, so for the really difficult things, they could shell out to the hosted service.

And so an integration with that proprietary service appears. There may be a paid plan associated with it, maybe for the more impressive tasks. It's all optional, so you can simply choose not to use it, so it's no problem, right? And in the end, that service will become more ethical due to Mozilla's involvement!

Huh, the AI market is trending down, it seems things are not going well, and investors are getting cagey, so the renewal of their product will have to be delayed to some later, eventual point, and for now they'll have to stick with the existing closed platform. But it's only temporary, and hey, in financially hard times we all need to do our part, right?

It's now three years later. ProprietaryCorp's AI system is still integrated into Firefox, Mozilla is now dependent on their yearly funding, so they can't just remove it. They never really came through with the ethical renewal of their platform, but they're nice people to work with, and nobody wants to rock the boat. Firefox now has a long-term integration with a proprietary hosted AI service that ensures its continued use.

re: google antitrust case, mozilla 

@kescher I really, truly hope that I am way off-base with this prediction. But I've also seen this pattern play out verbatim so many times over the years, just substitute 'blockchain' for 'AI'...

Been doing handheld battery maintenance since last night. All my PSP Streets and PSP Gos were dead so a little overdue. Just the Gos left for PSPs, then on to Vita, then Nintendo.

If you have anything with lithium rechargeable batteries, here's a reminder to check their charge levels occasionally so they don't end up as spicy pillows!

prediction, funding, AI, re: google antitrust case, mozilla 

@kescher Actually, let's try to predict the sequence of events in more detail, and I'm curious how close I'll end up being:

Mozilla will do a desperate funding drive, not just asking for donations, but also internally ask around to find investors in their own network. Nobody is willing to invest enough money for activist reasons to keep it afloat. Because of the entrenched structure of the organization, they cannot make it work with smaller offers of investments.

Eventually, a 'friendly' investor shows up who just so happens to be invested in an AI company. The AI company runs a proprietary cloud service, sure, but they've been looking to do better and go against the grain of the industry, and so they wish to partner with Mozilla, on the premise that Mozilla's ethical AI efforts are a good starting point for renewing their product to go in a more ethical direction.

However, their stakeholders need to be kept happy too, so in the short term, they would like for Mozilla to expand their AI offerings with something that integrates with their proprietary, hosted offerings. It will be optional, of course, and it would have a data protection agreement, and wouldn't it be good for the users too? After all, some AI models are just Too Hard to run locally, so for the really difficult things, they could shell out to the hosted service.

And so an integration with that proprietary service appears. There may be a paid plan associated with it, maybe for the more impressive tasks. It's all optional, so you can simply choose not to use it, so it's no problem, right? And in the end, that service will become more ethical due to Mozilla's involvement!

Huh, the AI market is trending down, it seems things are not going well, and investors are getting cagey, so the renewal of their product will have to be delayed to some later, eventual point, and for now they'll have to stick with the existing closed platform. But it's only temporary, and hey, in financially hard times we all need to do our part, right?

It's now three years later. ProprietaryCorp's AI system is still integrated into Firefox, Mozilla is now dependent on their yearly funding, so they can't just remove it. They never really came through with the ethical renewal of their platform, but they're nice people to work with, and nobody wants to rock the boat. Firefox now has a long-term integration with a proprietary hosted AI service that ensures its continued use.

re: google antitrust case, mozilla 

@kescher Unfortunately, I suspect that what will happen instead is that an AI company shows up with a bag of money and shallow promises of ethics, and Mozilla will have no choice but to 'partner' with them if it wants to continue existing.

@schratze i can connect my phone to my computer with bluetooth, and send audio from the phone to it

i have a jellyfin instance hosted on that computer, it is accessible through a domain name

the jellyfin instance contains my music collection, i can play it from my phone

through KDE connect i can control the media on my phone with KDE's media controls

isn't symbiosis beautiful :D

google antitrust case, mozilla 

@ytvwld@chaos.social That's the thing, though. One could plausibly develop a browser off donations, but I don't think one could plausibly *run Mozilla* off donations, because their entire organizational structure and expenses seem informed by them getting essentially bags of free money every year. They seem incapable of operating in the lean manner required to survive this.

It's not safe to turn off your computer. There are enemies nearby.

Show thread

google antitrust case, mozilla 

So. What's our contingency plan for Mozilla losing Google's funding again?

Any recommendations for an #Android app for keeping track of taking medicines/vitamins? Reminders etc.?

I used MediSafe for years, but they've enshittified it, now wanting 50€/yr to keep track of 3+ medicines/vitamins.🙄
play.google.com/store/apps/det

@voorstad @zandbelt (Daar parafraseer ik even, maar dat "normale mensen zijn minder slim dan wij techneuten" is helaas wel een wijdverbreid beeld, alleen zeggen ze het meestal niet zo expliciet)

@voorstad @zandbelt @Tweakers@mastodon.social Het idee dat dingen die anders werken automatisch te moeilijk zijn leeft helaas behoorlijk onder techneuten. Alleen meestal in de vorm van "dat snappen normale mensen [die natuurlijk minder slim zijn dan ik] toch nooit"...

Huh. One of the last non-electrified rail lines in the Netherlands (the Maaslijn) is finally getting electrified!

I see so many adults and professionals talking about how they are using LLMs to deepen their understanding of things, but I think this ultimately dives headlong into the “Gell-Mann amnesia” effect — these people think they are learning, but it only feels that way because there are ignorant enough about the topic they're interested in to not detect that they are being fed utter bullshit.

How shall we answer this? I think it speaks most urgently for people who actually know things, those with "intellectual power", to democratise our knowledge, throw aside the totems that make our fields inaccessible and obscure, and open the gates to the multitudes who wish to learn.

At first it seems like it would be easy to compete with LLMs (because they say only bullshit), but to actually compete with LLMs we need to produce educational materials that actually explain things properly. Any 'proof by intimidation' will immediately send our student to the LLM. The moment you rely on something that you haven't explained, same deal. So it may be that this era has a silver lining: we must finally teach mathematics properly.

Show thread

When you make something yourself

You want it to be a little janky

Not so janky that it's ugly or unusable

But just a couple spots where people can tell that it's homemade

feedback over de NPO op mastodon (ongezouten) 

@Dylan Dat is erg jammer. Het is me in de afgelopen maanden, wanneer ik een bericht van een NPO-omroep tegenkwam, opgevallen dat er vanuit de omroep nauwelijks op reacties ingegaan werd, en dan verbaast het me niet dat men op een gegeven weinig moeite meer doet en je dus weinig engagement ziet. Het moet wel van twee kanten komen.

Als ik het gelinkte artikel lees, dan lijkt daar ook een verwachting in uitgesproken te worden dat mensen in de reacties *met elkaar* in gesprek gaan, maar dat is m.i. geen redelijke verwachting - het gaat hier niet om een debatplatform waar de omroep een onderwerp specificeert dat mensen dan onderling moeten bespreken, maar om een gemeenschap waar ieder bijdraagt, ook de organisaties en bedrijven die er onderdeel van willen zijn.

Met andere woorden, als de omroepen van de NPO graag gesprekken willen zien onder hun berichten, dan zullen ze die gesprekken toch echt zelf aan moeten gaan, voorbij het posten van een linkje en een samenvatting, en niet enkel moeten verwachten dat kijkers en/of lezers dat voor hen doen. Er zijn enkele organisaties op de fediverse die dit wel doen, en die zien dan ook vele malen meer engagement.

subtoot 

More specific to the broadcaster I'm subtooting here: in their parting statement, I am reading a subtext of "we were hoping that people would start conversations with each other under our posts"

And like... what?? That is not how any of this works. You're not a debate moderator who assigns the topics to speak about and then lets others do the work. You need to actually participate in the conversation yourself, if you want it to be had!

Show thread

subtoot 

There's like a 1:1 correlation between "organizations whose experiments of being on fedi failed" and "organizations which treated fedi as a write-only bullhorn"

Show thread
Show older
Pixietown

Small server part of the pixie.town infrastructure. Registration is closed.