Father, Hacker (Information Security Professional), Open Source Software Developer, Inventor, and 3D printing enthusiast

  • 2 Posts
  • 455 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2023

help-circle
  • I work for a HUGE organization that uses all the big AI companies products. We have a contract for each that specifies that they MUST NOT train their models with our code.

    If they do it anyway, my employer’s vast teams of lawyers will make them take out brand new billion dollar loans to pay off the settlements. They might not even survive such a lawsuit because if they were caught using our code you can bet your ass they used everyone else’s that has a similar contract.




  • The pricing is garbage. The only benefit is the classic “unreasonable enterprise demands” (UED, that’s my term for it): Rather than use multiple tools that are each best in class (and possibly cheaper or even free!) enterprises will always choose one product that does all the things. Even if it does those things poorly or even worst-in-class.

    Example: VMWare. For ages, enterprises used VMWare for all their VMs because it could run/manage both Windows and Linux VMs from a single tool. Even though HyperV for Windows is vastly superior for Windows VMs and KVM is vastly superior for Linux VMs.

    Aside: Yes, you can run Linux on HyperV and Windows on KVM but neither are ideal.

    Windows Defender as an EDR is OK-ish for Windows but it’ll never top CrowdStrike Falcon or SentinelOne Singularity for Linux. It probably won’t be better than FOSS alternatives like Cilium Tetragon or even Falco (because of their flexibility/customizable nature).

    Edit: I also have a pretty firm belief that putting Windows people in charge of managing Linux systems (of any kind) is always a bad idea. Yet the very nature of the product (Microsoft Defender) insists upon this.


  • Most mutations are irrelevant or don’t impact anything until they’re duplicated enough times to matter.

    For example, every human has 6 to 24 copies of the genes that let us digest wheat: AMY1 (salivary) AMY2A / AMY2B (pancreatic).

    If any one or two of those mutate in the next generation, it won’t be noticeable or make any sort of impactful change.

    This is why changes from one species to another take hundreds of thousands of years (many generations). A whole lot of people will need to accumulate the same mutations and survive (or just reproduce) with those changes (when others don’t) for speciation to occur.

    About 70,000 years ago, nearly all humans on earth died, leaving behind just a few tens of thousands (maybe up to 200,000) that had just the right combinations of genes to survive. When that happened, humanity lost nearly all of its genetic diversity. It’ll be a long time before we diversify again (if we ever make it that far).







  • You can simulate “ADHD brain” with drugs and conditioning, similar to how PTSD alters people’s brain chemistry.

    The human brain is plastic/adaptive and can change, depending on the cost/benefit of action/reward conditioning. Just like how people with ADHD can see some improvement with training, a neurotypical brain can see some ADHD-like changes with the same sort of (anti?) training. That’s what I’m suggesting is happening in this AI study: People were rewarded for using the AI initially (dopamine response) but then that reward (easy way out) was taken away, and they performed more poorly as a result.

    It stands to reason that their reward center was trained to behave like an ADHD brain in that it could tell there was not going to be an easy way to gain a reward from the activity, so it didn’t bother putting in the necessary resources to achieve the outcome it would have accomplished if they were never given AI in the first place.

    The usual dopamine response was overridden, thus behaving like an ADHD brain.



  • I don’t think it’ll happen like Radium or Asbestos because those rely on scarcity. They’re physical things that can be physically controlled.

    AI models aren’t like that. In less than a minute anyone can download the latest models. In under an hour, they can have all the latest models sitting on their PC. Right now, there’s a shortage of memory and GPUs which makes them prohibitively expensive for the average person but that won’t always be the case!

    Ten years from now, everyone’s phones will have enough capabilities to run models that currently require a PC with a 32GB GPU.

    What we could do is force AI companies and software to put warnings in the chat interfaces like cigarette cartons: “WARNING: Using LLMs for just ten minutes increases the likelihood that you will have trouble completing difficult mental tasks afterwards.” (That was in the news this morning)

    We also definitely need international treaties that prevent countries from allowing AI to make the decision to kill people or destroy infrastructure. Though honestly, we’re already in a state where countries are willing to kill hundreds of people just to assassinate a single target (e.g. US and Israel bombing an entire building because they think their target is inside).

    These are small potatoes, though, compared to what AI could do to capitalism and inequality. The rate at which it is advancing is faster than people/jobs can keep up. It’s like half the population is ferriers and suddenly everyone was just given a free car.



  • No, no. You’ve got the wrong idea.

    Will AI completely ruin a zillion people’s ability to think (beyond what social media already accomplished)? Quite possibly!

    I’m just saying there’s nothing we can do to stop it at this point.

    You’re about to head down a long, lonely road as normies start using and accepting AI more and more into their lives while you scream into the abyss. I’ve been there with fossil fuels, copyright, software patents, and Linux.

    People saying “Just use AI!” Is about to live rent free in your head as your most-hated phrase. Just like, “stop driving gas guzzlers!” Or, “stop bitching about Windows and just install Linux already!” Lives in so many others.

    At least most people don’t think of AI as a core part of their identity (e.g. pickup trucks) 🤷



  • (And we do all the fancy shit, looping, custom harnesses, orchestrations, handovers, savepoints, post delivery pipelines, autoremediation, blablabla, context, graphs blabla)

    Yeah that’s not what I’m talking about. That’s just coding stuff and I think everyone is learning a hard lesson right now that there’s really two ways to do AI (for code):

    1. You let the AI write all the code. Using those techniques you mentioned to try to keep it from fucking up too much.
    2. You use the AI to fix/write a little bit of the code at a time. Manually. As in, someone who knows software architecture really well tells the AI to write a function or two or maybe even a whole module and that’s it. They do this repeatedly until their task is complete.

    #1 is a very expensive way to do it but it seems to work, albeit with a huge learning curve and a much longer horizon before you get something stable. Even then, what you get can be a giant fucking mess that’s really, really hard to understand.

    #2 is much safer and works quite well, IMHO. When the AI fucks something up, it’s only a tiny little thing that’s easy to fix. This method really is just a way for developers to improve their productivity.

    With #2, it only takes a small amount of tokens to have the AI help you troubleshoot as well. At least, that’s been my experience.

    Having said that, the places where we are seeing the most growth in AI is small shit. For example, at my work they implemented an agent that scans customer complaints and filters out false positives. I work for a huge company that has a zillion products/services and the AI has tool calls into our ticketing systems to check if there was an outage at the time the customer complained. It’s not that smart, but it’s smart enough to tell if a ticket about system X was opened when system X had an outage. It can even tell if the customer was complaining about something relevant to the outage.

    Stuff like that runs 24/7 and eats up bazillions of tokens, but only on our local hardware (we have thousands of enterprise GPUs). At other companies, they’re doing similar things and slowly realizing they can replace OpenAI/Anthropic API calls with local ollama stuff.

    Even if your token bill is $10,000/month for a service like that, it’s still cheaper than paying an entire team of humans to perform the same function.

    That is the growing use of AI automation I was talking about.


  • I had a similar problem with my shower valve. Turns out I didn’t need to replace the whole thing, just the core. Ordered a new one from Amazon for like $20 and that fixed the problem.

    The new core wasn’t a perfect fit, so I had to take apart the old one and use some of its parts in the new one (they fit perfectly). It was just a matter of unscrewing stuff and screwing it in, so it wasn’t a big deal.



  • It’s too late for that scenario. LLMs are already widespread on millions of computers.

    On my old 4060 Ti 16GB I can run Qwen3.8:14b and that’s actually good enough for loads and loads of things. It’s actually overkill for a lot of stuff too which is why tiny models are all the rage right now (e.g. 0.8b models).

    Let’s say the government banned LLMs. Are they really going to want to halt pharmaceutical and biomedical research like that? Are they going to start inspecting/requiring everyone’s computers be scanned regularly for AI models?

    No. It’s unrealistic to think they can do anything at all to stop AI. If we ban it in the US, the world will just use AI services offered from other countries and then the US won’t be able to compete because those countries will become vastly more productive.

    As much as everyone on Lemmy believes all AI output is “slop”, it really does do useful stuff! It’s just most of the useful stuff doesn’t make the news. It’s boring things like checking if an uploaded image is NSFW or if an uploaded document has everything it’s supposed to have or follows the correct format.

    AI/LLMs are also checking the grammar of basically everything that gets published. Anyone who’s not using AI for that is an idiot. It’s just way too fucking good at spotting grammatical errors, incorrect word use (often innocent typos that normal grammar checking tools miss), and similar problems.

    There’s fucktons of super useful, good ways to use AI. We’d be stupid to just ban it and pretend it isn’t good for a lot of things.

    We can regulate its use but that’s not really “regulating AI” as much as it is “regulating capitalism” or “regulating people”. Because the AI isn’t just going out on its own to spam misinformation or mislead consumers with generated product photos. Someone told it to do those things.

    What we need isn’t “AI regulation” is regular regulation that prevents companies from behaving badly.