The Unofficial "Elon Musk trying to "Save Everyone" from Themselves (except his Step-Sister)" Thread...

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

Been a long time since I sat though grad level AI courses, so maybe things have changed… but…

 

AI had a bad rap for a while for promising grand things then stalling out unable to get close. There’s an entire era called AI Winter where the subject was essentially abandoned due to the relentless mocking and ridicule from the scientific community about how short it fell from promises.
 

what kick started it was serious advances in probabilistic statistics. Which gave birth to the current era of AI where probabilistic statistics is leaned on heavily. Very very heavily. Even things like genetic mutation algorithms at their heart rely on probabilistic statistics to justly their likelihood to succeed in generating the algorithm that performs the way you want. 

which is you actually go through the history of AI you’ll find the bad rap was completely unwarranted - the real problems along the way we’re waiting for other fields of science to catch up, so AI could begin moving forward again. 
 

(huge hold up right now, not related to what I’m otherwise talking about, is robotics. Robotics is making huge leaps but the difficulties with Computer vision, making smooth motions, size of equipment, etc are hold ups. AI simply advances faster than robotics but heavily relies on robotics to move forward…)

 

but, back to the point why I’m quoting g you, when I left the field the hang up was with cognitive and neurological biology. In fact many of the university AI schools had begun partnering with their neuro science schools to collaborate. 
 

the idea back then was that the human brain is actually remarkable at what it does. The problem is it doesn’t do it very fast. Computers can do work significantly faster. But modeling the human brain into a system was impossible - a very small % of the human brain had even been mapped at the time. But it was highest priority work because that was the trajectory of the field. 
 

which is to say the goal is (or was) to make AI operate exactly like the human brain - but at exponentially higher speeds. Subtract emotions and bias, and perform significantly faster. 
 

I’ve been out of the field for over a decade so - not entirely sure if they’re still on that track or how far they’ve come. But your comment of thinking like us made me think to post this. 

Yes and that creeps me out too. 
 

But - I’m not interested in making it worse with extra features and devices  

 

Really great stuff on AI. My entry into the field is very recent so I don't have nearly the sort of backend historical perspective as you do.

 

Related to the serial processing issues with CPUs, I think another advancement that has helped the resurgence of AI in the past 10 years or so has been the rise of very powerful GPUs that can do parallel processing, so now super deep neural networks like ResNet-50 can be mapped and run very efficiently.

 

There are also a ton of new AI specific coprocessors that are coming out now. My company is potentially partnering with some of them. They boast the processing capability of the big Nvidia GPUs but with a fraction of their power needs (~500 watts for an Nvidia RTX 4090 vs about 15-20 watts for some of the AI specific chips), due to being hyper efficiently mapped and built to run neural networks, whereas GPUs are generalists.

[tshile]

9 minutes ago, mistertim said:

Related to the serial processing issues with CPUs, I think another advancement that has helped the resurgence of AI in the past 10 years or so has been the rise of very powerful GPUs that can do parallel processing, so now super deep neural networks like ResNet-50 can be mapped and run very efficiently.

If I’m recalling correctly -

neural networks came in hot at first

then they hit a wall and became something people ridiculed and mocked. “Oh yeah build your stupid neural network *snickers”

 

And now, as you’ve said, they’re back on track to accomplishing the original lofty goals put out at the start, and it’s no longer mocked. And it’s because some *other* discipline made and advancement, and fixed a bottle neck no one recognized until said advancement. 

 

i mean it still has limitations but previous limitations have been removed. It’s a microcosm of the entire sector. 
 

in 2008 I was laughed at for picking AI for grad school. It was that thing many thought was cool but was a dead end. Again. 
 

now 1/3 of the research staff were I did my undergrad is in the AI field. IAC, SRE, Security, any of the incredibly large productivity systems/apps/features, how that thing we all carry in our pocket works, your $prefferrd-streamingservice’s recommendation system…

 

its ****ing everywhere and I’m an idiot for not seeing that through at the time. Just total and complete idiot. 😂 

Edited December 2, 2022 by tshile

[unsonny]

 

How this guy pulled a musical genius like Grimes I’ll never understand.

 

 Carry on with your intellectual thread.   I have missed message boards for far too long.  

[The Evil Genius]

50 minutes ago, unsonny said:

 

How this guy pulled a musical genius like Grimes I’ll never understand.

 

 Carry on with your intellectual thread.   I have missed message boards for far too long.  

 

She left him for Chelsea Manning. Yeah, that Chelsea Manning.

 

Also...

 

 

[PleaseBlitz]

One naughty word. 
 

Spoiler

 

 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

49 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

One naughty word. 
 

  Hide contents

 

 

Always a bad move to argue with The First Amendment, literally.

 

But this whole protected by first amendment debate is silly. Say something rude and get punched in the mouth and let me know how protected you feel you were.

[TradeTheBeal!]

In other words, everyone has freedom of speech…but freedom AFTER speech is quite a privilege.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Good times.  Buy a Tesla.

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

Maybe Elno should focus on the billions that Kushner and Ivanka got paid from the Saudis.  

[The Evil Genius]

 

[Llevron]

I actually cannot avoid the conservative echo chamber on Twitter now. I don’t follow any of these people but the recommended tweets from conservatives drooling over Hunter Biden’s newly revealed dick pics are the top thing on my timeline now. This is the kind stuff that actually will make me stop using it. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

Yeah, Twitter is almost 4chan now.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

I read the release but it was kind of long and didn’t get to the point.

 

It seems like the gist of it was that both presidential campaigns could contact Twitter to have stuff removed from Twitter. Then they assert that because Twitter was full of liberals this helped Biden more easily/quickly get stuff removed, and they back this up by saying Biden got more stuff removed. 

[Renegade7]

They tryin to turn Twitter into TruthSocial...

 

The second DoD and White House leaves, I'm going where they going, this is getting ridiculous...

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

44 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

I read the release but it was kind of long and didn’t get to the point.

 

It seems like the gist of it was that both presidential campaigns could contact Twitter to have stuff removed from Twitter. Then they assert that because Twitter was full of liberals this helped Biden more easily/quickly get stuff removed, and they back this up by saying Biden got more stuff removed. 

That was pretty much what I read. The big scandal is that more conservative posts were deleted, and their conclusion is that Twitter was biased against conservatives, but it certainly could have been because more conservative posts were violating their terms of service.

[@DCGoldPants]

8 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

 

It's wild because now every 4th post is an ad. Sometimes for things you've already muted but they just unmute the ad in your feed.

 

 

 

 

I'm going to give a listen to this. 

[China]

11 hours ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

Good times.  Buy a Tesla.

 

 

 

Elon Musk’s promised Twitter exposé on the Hunter Biden story is a flop that doxxed multiple people

 

The documents don’t show what Musk thinks they show, and a US Representative is going to have to change his email address.

 

Free-speech crusader Elon Musk isn’t happy with Twitter’s years-old decision to suppress a news story about Hunter Biden’s laptop just ahead of the 2020 presidential election. So in an effort “to restore public trust” in Twitter, Musk indicated last month that he would release internal communications showing how it all went down.

 

That arrived Friday night in the form of a lengthy and arduously slow tweet thread (it took a full two hours to complete) from journalist Matt Taibbi, who Musk appears to have leaked the documents to and coordinated for his findings to be posted to Twitter.

 

Taibbi’s thread includes screenshots of emails between Twitter’s leadership, members of the Biden campaign, and outside policy leaders. At one point, there’s even a “confidential” communication from Twitter’s deputy general counsel.

 

The emails show Twitter’s team struggling with how to explain their handling of the New York Post story that broke the news of Hunter’s leaked laptop files — and whether they made the correct moderation decision in the first place. At the time, it was not clear if the materials were genuine, and Twitter decided to ban links to or images of the Post’s story, citing its policy on the distribution of hacked materials. The move was controversial even then, primarily among Republicans but also with speech advocates worried about Twitter’s decision to block a news outlet.

 

While Musk might be hoping we see documents showing Twitter’s (largely former) staffers nefariously deciding to act in a way that helped now-President Joe Biden, the communications mostly show a team debating how to finalize and communicate a difficult moderation decision.

 

“I’m struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this unsafe,” one former communications staffer wrote. “Will we also mark similar stories as unsafe?” asked another.

 

Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of trust and safety at the time, said the company had decided to err on the side of caution “given the SEVERE risks here and lessons of 2016.” Jim Baker, Twitter’s deputy general counsel, weighed in to agree that “it is reasonable for us to assume that they may have been [hacked] and that caution is warranted.”

 

The emails don’t show how the initial decision was reached — just that there were emails afterward in which leaders at Twitter discussed whether it was the correct choice. Taibbi reports that Jack Dorsey, who was then Twitter’s CEO, was not aware of the decision.

 

Musk seems to read the events as proof of government meddling. “If this isn’t a violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment, what is?” he wrote in response to one leaked email. But the email appears to show the Biden campaign, which is not a government entity, flagging tweets to Twitter for “review” under their moderation policies before the election took place. Taibbi says, “there’s no evidence — that I’ve seen — of any government involvement in the laptop story.”

 

Meanwhile, Taibbi’s handling of the emails — which seem to have been handed to him at Musk’s direction, though he only refers to “sources at Twitter” — appears to have exposed personal email addresses for two high-profile leaders: Dorsey and Representative Ro Khanna. An email address that belongs to someone Taibbi identifies as Dorsey is included in one message, in which Dorsey forwards an article Taibbi wrote criticizing Twitter’s handling of the Post story. What appears to be Khanna’s personal Gmail address is included in another email, in which Khanna reaches out to criticize Twitter’s decision to restrict the Post’s story as well.

 

The story also revealed the names of multiple Twitter employees who were in communications about the moderation decision. While it’s not out of line for journalists to report on the involvement of public-facing individuals or major decision makers, that doesn’t describe all of the people named in the leaked communications. And given the fervor around Hunter’s laptop, the leaked materials could expose some of those people to harassment. “I don’t get why naming names is necessary. Seems dangerous,” Twitter co-founder Biz Stone wrote tonight in apparent reference to the leaks.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[The Evil Genius]

 

[The Evil Genius]

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

Can't wait for Elon to unban @hitler

[Spaceman Spiff]

I didn't understand that Taibbi mess.  

[skinsmarydu]

12 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

I didn't understand that Taibbi mess.  

I didn't read too far into it, but he's not the journalist he once was. (Don't confuse him with his brother.)

[CobraCommander]