https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/18/ai-uk-competition-watchdog-cma
Risks include high prices as well as proliferation of false information, fraud and fake reviews, says CMA
Useless headline by useless journalists.
WATER COULD BE WET! IT COULD ALSO BE DRY! I DON'T KNOW.
Proprietary AI is what Sun Micro is to the internet; irrelevant. If you don't know; proprietary internet was a thing but Open Source killed it. Offline Open Source AI exists now. AI is the framework not the product. Open Source is the only future because Open Source is ownership. Ownership is Citizenship. Proprietary is ownership of a part of your person; slavery. Neo Digital Feudalism is for imbeciles.
I think people would be surprised at how little hard drive space some models take up when you compare it to what they can produce. You can store LLMs on your phone. Cat's out of the bag.
And despite any restrictions we try to make, there will be a company with great GPUs or TPUs that will be able to fine tune giant models without anyone knowing.
Agreed. the generative AI genie is out of the bottle, for better or worse, and there is no putting in back in. I understand a lot of the concerns people have around the technology, and I share a lot of them, but I don't see what bans and boycotts on a political or cultural level are going to solve.
Even if some countries were to ban or heavily restrict AI tech, others will not. The tech is becoming if not already portable enough to be surreptitiously used even if prohibited. Technological shifts tend to be inevitable and unavoidable, even when it they are very disruptive. There was no stopping the industrial revolution, the automobile, or the internet, and if there is enough real utility in it the same can be said for AI.
Trying to stifle AI will only cause it to develop in the shadows, which I think will only lead to worse outcomes if people become ignorant to to the technologies real capabilities and applications.
Even if some countries were to ban or heavily restrict AI tech, others will not.
Also, I'm convinced any country that heavily restricts its use will just be using their own at a federal level. All this untagged data that's collected from us through surveillance is pretty valuable. If AI could help a government find a serial killer would they use it? If AI could help a government positively identify a revolution would they use it?
Typical doomerism headline, AI boom could have a positive effect on productivity, as the CMA says.
If you view it through the lens of productivity sure.. but a space race-esque race to develop AI by the companies that we have learnt quite brazenly do not care about breaking rules/laws to maximise profit and market share? Colour me a doomer.
These LLM AIs are just regurgitating shit that's been fed into them. There's zero intelligence involved.
But they do make writing work emails a lot easier. I use chatgpt to write draft reports, always needs polishing but it's a lot easier than starting with a blank page, so I can see the productivity gains already.
LLMs are just regurgitating shit AND that’s most of what we do all day too.
(Speaking from a job as an innovator in a high tech field. Most of us are just doing engineering w/ concepts invented elsewhere. )
This is the best summary I could come up with:
People should not assume a positive outcome from the artificial intelligence boom, the UK’s competition watchdog has warned, citing risks including a proliferation of false information, fraud and fake reviews as well as high prices for using the technology.
The Competition and Markets Authority said people and businesses could benefit from a new generation of AI systems but dominance by entrenched players and flouting of consumer protection law posed a number of potential threats.
The CMA made the warning in an initial review of foundation models, the technology that underpins AI tools such as the ChatGPT chatbot and image generators such as Stable Diffusion.
The emergence of ChatGPT in particular has triggered a debate over the impact of generative AI – a catch-all term for tools that produce convincing text, image and voice from typed human prompts – on the economy by eliminating white-collar jobs in areas such as law, IT and the media, as well as the potential for mass-producing disinformation targeting votes and consumers.
“There remains a real risk that the use of AI develops in a way that undermines consumer trust or is dominated by a few players who exert market power that prevents the full benefits being felt across the economy.”
In the longer term, a handful of firms could use FMs [foundation models] to gain or entrench positions of market power and fail to offer the best products and services and/or charge high prices.”
The original article contains 659 words, the summary contains 239 words. Saved 64%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!