The scenario begins with AI agents undergoing a “jump in capability”.

Might as well stop reading there. Another fluff piece about how useful and capable AI supposedly is, disguised as a doomsday scenario. I’m so sick of reading this bullshit. “Agentic AI” based on LLMs does not work reliably yet and very likely never will.

If you complain about bugs in traditional (deterministic) software, you ain’t seen nothing yet. A probabilistic system such as an LLM might or might not book the correct flight for you. It might give you the information you have asked for or it might delete your inbox instead.

As a consequence of a system being probabilistic, anything you do with it works or fails based on probabilities. This really is the dumbest timeline.

Can someone explain to mr why these people are buying Mac Minis to run this in a “safe” environment and then they go on and connect it to the internet and give the AI credentials to all their cloud accounts? This seems excessively moronic to me? Am I missing something?

Yeah the Antrophic guys are also firmly in the “believer” group.

I think that Satya Nadella and a lot of other CEO types genuinely believe in AI, as misguided as it seems. This is more about who they choose to listen too than having an actual understanding of the technology and its limits. And probably some FOMO sprinkled on top.

Sam Altman knows what’s up though and so does Jensen Huang. In this gold rush one is peddling the fake gold and the other is selling the shovels.

Do you have a source for that backtracking about AI? I think they did not mention that explicitly. Instead they were talking about unrelated improvements. The CEO is still in denial about AI bloat. He seems unable to comprehend that people don’t like to be force fed AI everywhere across the OS.

I’ve seen a lot of supermarkets recently where the mechanism is still there but all the carts are unlocked, so that you don’t need to insert a coin anymore. At least where I live this works just as well and people return their carts into the stack. We were probably conditioned to do it during the last years when the coin was still necessary, and now it just sticks.

because they can sell it for more money and as a bonus controlling people’s data gives them power. Supervillains love technology.

This orb surveillance thingy looks like Wheatley from Portal 2, an AI which eventually turned evil. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheatley_(Portal) I’m sure that’s a good sign.

Probably depends on what AI DDG is using… I switched DDG to noai so I don’t see any generated results

Interesting, if i do site:neocities.org with a random search term e.g. site:neocities.org anime in DDG I get zero results. In google, this yields thousands of neocities subdomains. Do you get any relevant results in DDG this way?

I chose a random neocities website and searched with both DDG and Google. The search was “irony machine neocities” without quotes. Google yielded a result which pointed to the correct URL https://irony-machine.neocities.org/ while DDG did not.

Yeah, I think SEO is pretty much dead by now, and probably because web search as we knew it is kind of dead as well. You’ll probably need to spend ad money if you want visibility. But I’m no expert on SEO and I could be wrong.

Before you say haha no one is using bing… Your beloved DuckDuckGo uses bing results and this means it’s censored there too. And it’s not only about the start page https://neocities.org/ (which can be found with DuckDuckGo via Wikipedia Snippet). None of the hosted sites are in the index.

It’s not that wild of a conspiracy theory. Hard to get definite proof though because you would have to compare actual search results from the past with the results of the same search from today, and we unfortunately can’t travel back in time.

But there are indicators for your theory to be true:

• It’s evident that in UI design the top area of the screen is the most valuable. AI results are always shown there. So we know that selling AI is of utmost importance to Google.
• The Google search algorithm was altered quite often over the years, these “rollouts” are publicly available information, and a lot of people have written about the changes as soon as they happened.
• Page ranking fueled a whole industry which was called SEO (Search Engine Optimization). A lot of effort went into understanding how google ranks its results. This was of course done with a different goal in mind but the conclusions from this field can be used to determine if and how search results got worse over time
• It’s an established fact that companies benefit from users never leaving the company’s ecosystem. Google as an example tried to prevent a clickthrough to the actual websites in the past, with technologies like AMP or by displaying snippets.
• If users rely on the AI output Google can effectively achieve this: the user is not leaving the page and Google has full control over what content the user sees.

Now, all of the points listed above can be proven. If you put all of that together it seems at least highly likely that your “conspiracy theory” is in fact true.

The article itself looks like it’s written with AI. Inconsistencies, repetitions, dull language and an unnecessary bullet point summary at the end. While I haven’t read the actual study, nothing in the article seems to explain what makes this causation instead of correlation.

Personally I’m a bit annoyed with articles like these because they try to create the impression that criticism of AI only stems from it being too powerful, instead of recognizing that the technology has very real capability limits. What is presented as two opposing viewpoints is effectively just one. AI boosters and AI doomers are both strong believers in something that hasn’t happened yet and probably won’t happen for a very long time.

solve this by upvoting what I like

This doesn’t solve the privacy issue. It still enables bad actors to create a very detailed profile of who you are, just by looking at the content you upvoted. Your interests, political alignment, medical/mental health issues, sexual orientation… just to name a few.

Not the OP, but i find it concerning because this enables creating a very detailed profile of a users interests, political alignment, medical issues, sexual orientation etc. Even if they never post anything! We should all know by now that there are bad actors actively using this kind of data in the worst ways imaginable. In the US this can already have life threatening consequences (ICE raids etc…)

This is not a good privacy oriented design and it exposes users in a dangerous way.

EDIT: About lemvotes.org. I like this site because it makes it obvious how dangerous this really is. For example I accidentally upvoted a really disgusting NSFW post misclicking on my phone. This will forever be visible to the world. I’m a documented pervert now. Good job.

It will probably fail silently, if it doesn’t pick up enough momentum. * Sad failed platform noises *

Y tho

Sorry you had this experience. Not all of us are like that though. I just thought of my own experience and I usually try to find an answer with a web search instead of asking in a forum. Most of the time someone else already had the problem and was brave enough to ask. This is especially true for beginner problems. As rough as some of those people can be, there already is a tutorial for almost anything imaginable. And it goes both ways. Don’t ask for stuff that can easily be found on the web. (I’m not implying you did, this is just a general tip)