@remington he said that AI is going to hurt women and help working class males? This is just rubbish, it’s not a shocking confession. Working class males? I think you’re referring to service production jobs and those are not increasing based on AI. So the CEO is trying to appeal to them by throwing women on a burning cross as usual. If men would stop agreeing to sacrifice women, we would be a much more powerful force of proletariat. And we don’t want AI to be in charge of us
Malcolm Ferguson wrote the title for this article not @remington.
Take anything Palantir says about democracy as either a dog whistle or a threat. Palantirs product is mass surveillance and criminal behavior prediction (location, whereabouts, movement patterns). That’s authoritarian, but not necessarily antidemocratic. You can still vote and be a democracy with mass (edit: typo was with ass survelliance…might still work) surveillance, don’t conflate it.
Where the anti Democratic comes in is using that surveillance to prevent people from exercising their right to vote and manipulating their information so they vote how you want. That’s what Palantir is enabling.
Aside: Its nuts how accurate their name is in spirit. Almost commendable they carried through embracing the name and the power behind it.
You know in certain animal groups when a member of the herd or whatever becomes a danger to the rest of the group, say through some kind of disease or injury or increased aggression or mental issue, that heard will eliminate the threat to the herd.
I like the idea that they think that educated jobs only belong to women. That’s an interesting thought.
The sad truth is that this shit isn’t going to replace “highly educated” jobs, and that the AI gravy train will end once people start to enforce basic intellectual property enforcement. Time is ticking, and the market taking a hit now is making them scramble.
Given that copy desks were being gutted more than a decade ago just with little things like Grammarly, it absolutely will replace knowledge jobs. It won’t be better, but it will mean more share buybacks.
It doesn’t need to be good to replace jobs, as long as there are no consequences for the people making those decisions.
I’ve lost count of how many “oops, it was AI’s fault, not my fault!” stories I’ve heard, even within highly regulated fields. Like, lawyers submitting documents with completely fake citations, and then…no real consequences. Seems to me like that should be cause for immediate disbarment, but no, apparently not.
The lack of consequences has been a problem for quite a while now, from before LLMs. In my opinion it’s been caused by a widespread increase in professional incompetence, together with a mutually protective network of incompetent people. “I won’t point out that you’re incompetent and won’t blame you for your mistakes, if you do me the same favour”.
They call it “imposter syndrome”, but it isn’t a syndrome: it’s a symptom.
Indeed: Everything was already AI
This has been a very long project — separating conduct from consequences, in order to maximize profit. AI is just a breakthrough tool for doing it.
This roughly mirrors my experience in corporate America.
I’m a licensed professional engineer and was working on evaluating some claims for a client. When I was done, my results were sent to the PR arm of the company. The PR people tried to use CoPilot to redo my work and make the claims language. Their results were full of hallucinated errors with no supporting evidence. The project manager was not happy.
I’d not have put the clickbait “shocking” in the hed, but regardless, we’re running out of things to take off. Masks, gloves … they want us totally naked, and preferably underage.
maybe heads will be next…
I know! Let’s take off our heads!
A Labyrinth reference? Glorious.
I half agree with you and @Mercurial@todon.nl – the “shocking” part is mostly that he would pitch this directly in public, but the “confession” part is more of an offer or a wish
Malcolm Ferguson wrote the title for this article not @reminington.
I’m aware. I was referring to the initial editorial judgment by the pub.
if we don’t do it, our adversaries will do it
“If I don’t stab you, someone else will. Therefore I have an obligation to stab you.” - crazed mass stabber
The only justification you could possibly have would be that if we don’t do it, our adversaries will do it. And we will be subject to their rule of law.…
Quick, undermine democratic values and rule of law before someone else does!
