You’re not doing this but to your example: Guns don’t have numerous other positive use cases, so AI is simply not a fair comparison.

And in the case of AI, given the media environment the fact that it’s being used to save millions of hours doing back office automation is never covered.

So yes this is a prime argument for AI. It’s just a tool with a myriad of uses that no one covers cuz they’re boring.

As to the rest of the authors argument, obviously I’m aware of its myriad negative consequences but just disagree that banning matrix math or NIMBY-ying warehouses where matrix math happens is somehow a solution to those problems.

You want to talk about policy fixes at the level of applications, I’m all ears.

▲

apparent a day ago | parent | next [-]

> Guns don’t have numerous other positive use cases, so AI is simply not a fair comparison.

They may not have numerous positive use cases, but the one where they save your life is a pretty good one. People who live where police are nearby don't appreciate how different things are out in the country.

▲

pj_mukh a day ago | parent [-]

Digression, but gun laws (or lack thereof) apply equally to cities where most people live and where guns wreck most of their havoc and cities are banned from passing any laws to help fix. Different issue entirely.

In fact this kind of case-by-case handling is exactly what I’m asking for in AI as opposed to blanket laws.

▲

apparent a day ago | parent | next [-]

I appreciate that they can save lives in cities/suburbs as well. I was just pointing out that an item does not need to have "numerous" positive use cases to counterbalance downsides. It is sufficient to have one sizable positive use case, which firearms do have. People who live in proximity to police may not feel this way, but people who live out in the country tend to have a different take (popular saying: when seconds count, the sheriff is minutes away).

▲

zombot a day ago | parent | prev [-]

No case-by-case handling can negate the energy costs and other side effects of datacenters, for instance. Your arguments are sophistry.

	▲	pj_mukh 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Energy costs are a function of energy supply. We have infinite energy being beamed down to us everyday. Using energy as a cudgel to suppress demand and deflate economic growth is the real sophistry.

▲

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

_superposition_ a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's NIMBY all the way down. Murica...

▲

SirFatty a day ago | parent | prev [-]

"NIMBY-ying warehouses where matrix math happens is somehow a solution to those problems"

You think the opposition to the datacenters is an effort to sop AI? ffs.