The alignment problem is already the wrong narrative, as it implies agency where there is none. All that talk about “alignment problem” draws focus from AI ethics (not a term I made up).

Read the article.

Then you highlight why AI Safety is important by linking a blog post about the dangers of poorly thought-out AI systems

Have you read the article? it clearly states the difference of AI safety vs AI ethics and argues why the formerare quacks and the latter is ignored.

If you read AI Safety trolley problems and think they are warning you about an ai god, you misunderstood the purpose of the discussion.

Have you encountered what Sam Altman or Elsevier Yudkowsky claim about AI safety? It’s literally “AI might make humanity go extinct” shit.

The fear mongering Sam Altman is doing is a sales tactic. That’s the hypeman part.

I know of him and I enjoy his videos.

Still, fearmongering for a god AI that might kill us all is both unscientific and distracts from the real harm so-called AI is already causing.

This post is especially ironic, since AI and its “safety researchers” make climate change worse by ridiculously increasing energy demands.

So-called “AI safety” researchers are nothing but hypemen for AI companies.

Do you want to readegermansmemessfrom ich_iel? Cause that’s how you get german memes from ich_iel.

Violence of any kind will not be tolerated.

Cringe

Yeah, I assumed that the bone-boobs were included in gender-affirming surgery.

Sorry, if my joke wasn’t as thought through as it should have been. Hadn’t had lunch back then. 😅

As someone who likes to see the good in the world, I’d say: “checkmate, transphobes, who claim that archaeologists won’t be able to identify my gender via skeleton”.

Kaufland is open to marketplace skalpers.

Policemen aren’t bootlickers! They wear the boot! Better call them class traitors.

No parallel universes employed => Access denied

deleted by creator

Here’s an actual AI evangelist/researcher making a point how open source can’t apply to neural networks (or LLMs)

Edit: Also, I’m not talking about the assets. I’m tal*ing about the ability to recreate. If you have the Doom assets, you can build it yourself.

Are you serious?

You can read all the other comments which explained why it is not open source. You can’t really retrain the model without petabytes of data. Even if you “train” stuff on your dataset: it’s more like tweaking the model weights a bit, rather than building the model from scratch.

“Open source” is PR talk by Meta and deepseek.

Just regurgitating propaganda.

No u.

Communism is defined by worker control of the means of production

No, that’s socialism. Communism is a stateless, classless, moneyless society.

Also, the workers in China aren’t in control of the means of production. The bureaucrats and capitalists are.

That’s how they lifted 800 million people out of poverty

While I applaud the better living standards: I see no contradiction to capitalism. Marx himself wrote:

The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of Nature’s forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam-navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalisation of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground — what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labour?

Simply participating in markets does not make a country capitalist

No, but state ownership of the means of production makes a country state capitalist.

Let’s come back to your initial point: you accused me of dismissing an LLM, because it is “communist”. Comrade, I’m an anarcho-communist. I dislike all the hypetrain riding, water gobbling sharlatans in the current so-called “AI” bubble: Altman, Pashaj (don’t know how to write him), Zuckerberg and Musk. I like it if the market get disrupted, but I don’t like it if the AI trend continues to wreak havoc on nature.

Btw: how is deepseek “energy efficient”?

And also: All that has squat to do with open source or not.

I was specifically addressing the use of the phrase “open source”. And the term “open data” doesn’t apply either, since it’s not a dataset that’s distributed, but rather weights of an LLM with data baked into it. That’s neither open source nor open data.

I’m not into gambling and know that the house always wins.

The differenge is that the dataset is baked into the weights of the model. Your emulation analogy simply doesn’t have a leg to stand on. I don’t think you know how neural networks work.

The standards are literally the basis of open source.

China is a state-capitalist, bourgeois society. They’re not a communist society.

Also: LLMs aren’t energy efficient.