Submitted by thecoffeejesus t3_11b5vs6 in singularity
helpskinissues t1_j9w47cr wrote
This subreddit lacks imagination as well, it's mostly fanboying OpenAI because chatGPT was the first, criticizing Google, Meta, etc... And being all the time "product over research!!!".
Fortunately some smart people wander these lands.
I am genuinely surprised that people are discovering AI now (in this community) when movies like Ex Machina or even Terminator were done ages ago.
Yes, AI will surpass humans. Yes, we will use technology to enhance our lives and intelligence. Human species without enhancements won't be productive to work in any job in a matter of decades.
Etc etc. It's all known.
But for example I don't see people in this subreddit acknowledging Waymo (or Cruise or even Tesla self driving AI). Waymo is directly changing people's lives and removing taxi jobs right now using an AI system able to ride as good as humans, and nobody gives a damn fuck, we all talk about a chatbot that can write Edgar Allan Poe poems nobody care about. Obviously biased.
Today's release of Llama is one of the most impressive feats in the last months, we'll see major effects of such event in through the year.
thecoffeejesus OP t1_j9w7jto wrote
I completely agree with you. With the way things are going, the divide between the people with access to this tech, and the people without it is going to be astronomical.
I’m just hoping that regular folks like me can ride the wave
helpskinissues t1_j9wptin wrote
Lol, to some people here (check replies to my comment) having 24x7 self driving cars without drivers in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Phoenix in 2023 is nothing.
People are not understanding what it's happening. Literally robots replacing our driving skills NOW, not in the future, NOW, and people are like "yeah but it can't run in a Norwegian mountain yet". Lol.
cypherl t1_j9wz653 wrote
I feel you. The older people I work with keep saying things like these electric cars are never going to work. They might have a long list of draw backs my old friends but Norway goes 100% electric for new cars in 2025. It's not coming. It's here now.
Deadboy00 t1_j9x50uk wrote
https://jalopnik.com/san-francisco-wants-new-restrictions-on-cruise-waymo-1850050281
Just because you can move the goal post doesn’t necessarily guarantee an actual goal.
helpskinissues t1_j9xs52z wrote
Woah, lobbies against new tech endangering jobs. What a surprise.
Do you usually trust politicians this much? Without any data to back it up?
Exel0n t1_j9y6n2x wrote
let them kill themsleves.
back in 19th century, places that rejected railway due to XYZ reasons ended up decaying while the ones got hooked on rails became booming towns, lasting to today. e.g. railway in Taiwan, in Siberia etc. the cities actively rejected rails passing thru them soon after declined and its place got replaced
if SF want to be the next, so be it.
Tall-Junket5151 t1_j9z4bky wrote
Humans are surprisingly adaptable, things that would have blown my mind even 5 years ago I take for granted now. I live in California and am often in the Bay Area where I see waymo cars without batting an eye. I have a Tesla and 95% of my highway drive is via autopilot without even really thinking about it. It’s just all so normal to me. Same with language models, I tried GPT-3 when it just came out and that truly blew my mind, more than ChatGPT because that was my first encounter. Even AI art seems normal to me now. So it’s not to say that tech isn’t mind blowing, it’s that you eventually get used to it. I mean take an objective look, the fact that tech like computers exist at all is mind blowing in itself.
The most recent thing that impressed me was AI voice synthesis with Elevenlabs, but I’m sure like everyone I will get used to it. So people will always focus on the next big thing and that at the moment is ChatGPT or large language models as a whole.
visarga t1_ja5036a wrote
> Humans are surprisingly adaptable, things that would have blown my mind even 5 years ago I take for granted now.
No way automation can keep up, we'll take everything for granted and still have to work to bring it to the next level.
Difficult_Review9741 t1_j9wa5th wrote
I seriously doubt anyone has lost a job due to Waymo. It operates in only some parts of two cities.
Tesla "self driving" definitely hasn't taken even one job.
kaityl3 t1_j9xu3dd wrote
My cousin works for Anthem, and was in the claims department - they recently deployed an AI to read through and analyze/approve or reject claims. A human employee would then review its work.
I believe he said 70% of its judgements required no further human editing; the reviewer didn't have to do anything but check off on the AI's work.
MrTacobeans t1_j9yedqd wrote
This is exactly the kind of AI that shouldn't even be scary. It's taking monotonous labor and doing the majority of it. If anthem holds true to any kind of decency their employees can focus on other pursuits within the company while an AI crunches the nitty gritty bits.
If that AI axes 70% of the workforce without proper movement to New adventures for each affected employee that's criminal. But also a possible situation unfortunately :/
drekmonger t1_j9znjjt wrote
> This is exactly the kind of AI that shouldn't even be scary.
Shouldn't be scary. Should be celebrated.
But...capitalism. The people who control such systems will get stupid wealthy, and the people who will be out of a job will go starve under a bridge.
visarga t1_ja50rdh wrote
Probably having to verify AI takes 50% of the time do do it manually, so the relative advantage is smaller.
But another advantage of teaming human+AI is that AI can be calibrated and ensure a baseline of quality. Humans might have higher variance, have a bad day, be tired, inattentive. So it is useful to increase consistency, not just volume.
madali0 t1_j9yrqcl wrote
Isn't that basically how it has always been? Some primal smart guy invents a tool, which replaces some menial job and makes it easier and faster with the tool. And on and on with every tool, could be a wheel, could be a hoe, could be a toaster, it's all basically the same idea
helpskinissues t1_j9wp41x wrote
"cities" bigger than European countries.
turnip_burrito t1_j9wwcvy wrote
Specifically Andorra, Vatican City, Lichtenstein, and like a couple others which are all tiny.
helpskinissues t1_j9xs1pu wrote
You must be a troll lol. Have you compared the populations of Los Angeles, San Francisco or Phoenix?
Edit: if you're lazy to check, Andorra has 80k population. Los Angeles, San Francisco and Phoenix more than 1 million each. Probably around 5-7 million citizens together. Which is more than Denmark, Finland, Norway, Estonia, Latvia... That have less than 6 million citizens per country.
So imagine a whole country like Finland/Denmark having self driving cars everywhere.
turnip_burrito t1_j9xsnps wrote
There's a lot of people. So what?
All those cities are well-marked and mapped for the most part compared to most everywhere else. And their weather is also better than most everywhere else (clear skies most of the time, almost no snow to speak of).
helpskinissues t1_j9xsy0f wrote
"so what?" So Andorra and Vaticano are just trolling examples. We're talking about human drivers being replaced for AI drivers in cities as populated as whole countries.
Most capital cities are very well mapped in every modern country. Weather isn't that good and the only reason Waymo is still not available in other places is because of licensing, not because of technical capabilities. Waymo already has ability to handle storms or snow.
Anyway, you're the only one discussing here about Waymo being able to drive in extreme scenarios, I don't see the point or how it's related to the thread. chatGPT can only work where there's stable Internet as well lol. Tech has limitations by default.
turnip_burrito t1_j9xu8nu wrote
I'm pointing out that your phrasing "larger than European countries" is deceptive. If you are being honest, then in terms of land size (square kilometers), those cities are larger than those countries, and only those countries. Certainly not Spain, France, or Germany, all of which are larger in square footage than Phoenix, SF, and LA.
I'm not sure how relevant population is when basically nobody uses self-driving cars in those cities. You see more cars on the road, and pedestrians/cyclists, which I guess is the point you are making?
Weather isn't that good? Are you kidding me? All three of those cities have good weather for driving conditions. Anyhow it's good to hear Waymo can handle storms and snow.
If you can bring up self-driving cars in this thread that doesn't mention them in the OP, then I can continue to discuss the details of self-driving cars in a reply to your post. It's fair game.
helpskinissues t1_j9xunie wrote
The impact of technology is measured in users, not in land size.
Weather isn't that good. It has rain (last weeks heavy rain). And driving conditions on Los Angeles is far from the best in the world, they're infamous for having a terrible traffic.
I don't have any issue with your mention of limitations of Waymo, but that's missing my point: how AI is impacting human lives (not land size). And when you discover that the main limitation of Waymo release is actually political licensing, well, even more surprising.
turnip_burrito t1_j9xv56c wrote
>The impact of technology is measured in users, not in land size.
How many people in these cities actually have cars that are driving themselves?
helpskinissues t1_j9xvj6l wrote
No need to own chatGPT just like there's no need to own Waymo cars. It's basically a service. And millions are able to use it right now (albeit maybe around 1 million because of licenses, not fully released yet for every user).
But, Cruise also exists.
Arizona, San Francisco...
As far as I can understand, it's around 1-3 million citizens having available an actual effective alternative to human drivers.
And if we count Tesla (I wouldn't, but it's still an impressive driving assistant) as self driving, we jump to dozens of millions very quickly.
vivehelpme t1_jacsmcn wrote
>Tesla "self driving" definitely hasn't taken even one job.
It took the job of the kamikaze pilot
play_yr_part t1_j9wjphf wrote
this. IDK the timeframe for completely autonomous self driving as it seems to have been "within a decade" for like a decade now lol w but with Tesla's self driving at least, recent updates have sometimes been one step forward two steps back.
Entirely possible another car maker's version could change that in a flash though.
helpskinissues t1_j9wpg4g wrote
So having 24x7 no-driver self driving cars operating in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Phoenix (and waiting to obtain license to run on New York and other cities) is not "completely autonomous driving"? Why do you focus on Tesla that isn't even trying to replace drivers?
play_yr_part t1_ja5n5p7 wrote
Late reply, and I confess my ignorance about Waymo other than the occasional thing I see on social media. If they're likely to scale up in a way where things will be vastly different in several years time then fair enough.
Kennybob12 t1_j9wph4w wrote
Mercedes actually just passed tesla with their certification to use their fsd based system in the US. Which to me is a better sign than any that we are approaching that precipice. Im much more interested in relevant biz injecting some ai into their process than some hot shot with a (or some rockets) dream who cant make a decent vehicle to save his life.
Surur t1_j9xj4ww wrote
Mercedes's system is really bad - it just follows the car in front, and if there is not a car in front it wont activate.
[deleted] t1_ja0ijct wrote
[deleted]
Kennybob12 t1_ja3tpxh wrote
Are you in nevada? That is the only place it's been registered to operate as of today. Otherwise, yes you are still driving a level 2. No matter what your experience is, there takes a certain level of criteria to be certified as level 3. Tesla doesn't just get some magic pass. They dont have it. They are close, but by going off radar they will create more problems than they will solve.
[deleted] t1_ja3zape wrote
[deleted]
Kennybob12 t1_ja8dwbf wrote
Hurts when they even have to say that it's not level 3....
Kennybob12 t1_ja433w0 wrote
you're absolutely right the last time i saw a mercedes phantom break or spontaneously combust was because of its inferior autopilot. Maybe the software is there, but the car is miles away from what it promises. And unfortunately you still drive a car, not a program.
PhysicalChange100 t1_j9y3uu3 wrote
To be fair, there's a growing movement where cars are not seen as part of the future but seen as a hindrance to progress.
And frankly I support that movement, car oriented cities are a nightmare to live in. No wonder people are not excited for Waymo
r/fuckcars
helpskinissues t1_j9y3ya7 wrote
Electric noiseless cars without drivers without deaths? Well. Sounds cool to me.
PhysicalChange100 t1_j9y4kfk wrote
Well it does not sound cool as much when you imagine millions of people having these cars, basically recreating traffic. And a whole list of problems associated with car oriented cities.
High speed trains, buses, bikes, tramway tracks, are more efficient and ideal way of transportation.
helpskinissues t1_j9y4y2e wrote
Not really that more efficient nor effective unless you add a relevant part done by foot plus delays. Buses are really bad and slow compared to taxis even in best scenarios.
Also disagree with the "recreating traffic" argument. More people would use public transportation thanks to mini buses with self driving.
Puzzleheaded_Pop_743 t1_j9yckq3 wrote
I think you are missing their point. They are just saying that many cities are just structured so inefficiently that cars are required to live there. But this is not necessary.
helpskinissues t1_j9yd07j wrote
That's unrelated to self driving technology, it's not a criticism nor a reason to be against the technology, it's unrelated.
Deadboy00 t1_j9yr02x wrote
If policy increases the capacity for more cars to be on the road, it will increase the amount of cars on the road.
Mo cars, mo problems.
Nyc and other cities are actively trying to limit the amount of congestion. 14th street in Manhattan (one of widest, most travelled) has been restricted to busses and bikes for the last couple years. Plus they’re congestion fees, tolls, etc to discourage cars. And more legislation* is on the way.
*with overwhelming support by the public
helpskinissues t1_j9yrauh wrote
I don't see any contradiction between restricting the amount of vehicles and self driving technologies. In every city with vehicle limitations, taxis are available. Waymo are basically next gen taxis. So I don't see any issue.
HolmesMalone t1_j9yl8lc wrote
On a post about lacking imagination.
The self driving cars can include buses and minivans. They can transfer you to a bus etc. overall this requires wayyyy less vehicles and wayyyyy less parking spaces, allowing existing cities and infrastructure to be reclaimed for walking etc. So in SF they have the iconic cable cars. This could be like that.
Tall-Junket5151 t1_j9z6kit wrote
You lack conceptual understanding of future tech, full self driving cars wouldn’t have any traffic because they would coordinate perfectly.
Additionally, I like living in the suburbs and will never live in cramped inner city apartments. A car is the best option because it’s the most effective means of transportation for me. If I want to go somewhere I just get in my car and drive there. I don’t have to learn which convoluted public transportation routes might get me there. Even worse if it’s raining or snowing outside because public transportation never drops you off at your destination, there usually a decent walk associated with it. So no thanks.
SnipingNinja t1_ja05rob wrote
People are understanding llama, it's capable of running on consumer hardware that many are likely to own, the future is coming fast.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments