People complain about AI possibly being unreliable, then actively root for things that are designed to make them unreliable.

LLMs are an implementation on the way to AGI.

They are making investments in green energy for their data center usage.

Our current economic model is insufficient to handle advancement in technology.

I have never had issues finding out information about file formats, or finding conversion tools for them.

The AI is not the problem in this case. The economic model is. It is not an economic model suitable for the advancement of technology.

Do you realize these companies are now making bigger investments into green energy?

This was always going to happen with the advancement of technology. It’s inevitable so long as humanity survives long enough.

Like what?

I think the exemption would be necessary to keep up with other nations who aren’t and will never be beholden to such laws.

I disagree with your take. I’ve found it extremely helpful in my life. I find using it and learning with it to be an enriching experience. I find following it’s development and seeing it grow to be exciting. I see the possibilities of all the positive things it could do for the future of humanity.

I don’t think a 10 year old could explain subatomic particles and the fundamental forces of the universe to me. I don’t think they could refresh my memory of how to do geometry to help my son with his homework. I don’t think a 10 year old could write a program for me to keep track of all the ebooks I have saved to my hard drive.

It’s fairly obvious what’s happening here. A bunch of people complaining about that newfangled thing they don’t understand or see the full potential of, just like for every new technology that has ever emerged. The automobile would never take off. Humans would never fly. TV was a fad. The Internet wouldn’t flourish. Rinse and repeat.

Why?

The billionaires are the ones with the resources to develop this tech. We could nationalize it, but then people would complain about that too for different reasons.

Well, then we should see their want to change copyright in this way as a good thing. People complain when YouTubers get copyright struck even if their content is fair use or transformative of something else, but then suddenly become all about copyright when AI is mentioned.

The toothpaste is out of the tube. We can either develop it here and outpace our international and ideological competitors, or we can stifle ourselves and fall behind.

The future comes whether you want it to or not.

I don’t think you’ve thought that out to its logical conclusion.

I understand your frustration, but it’s a necessary thing we must do. Because if it’s not us, well then it will be someone else and that could literally be devastating.

It’s not tech for techs sake, and it’s not exploitation.

It’s not shitty tech.

I find it odd that Lemmy users are so adverse to tech.

Sorry to say, but he’s right. For AI to truly flourish in the West, it needs access to all previously human made information and media.