At the end of the day I think if people find the use of AI charming/effective to resurrect dead celebrities they will go along with it. This sounds like a horrible tv show/use case but by and large audiences just want to be entertained and will accept "ghoulish" resurrections if it is entertaining. Darth Vader's voice will be around for quite a bit longer for example.
It was an impasse. Chicago wants the development money and tourism, but it also holds pretty strongly to the idea that the lakefront belongs to everyone and shouldn't be developed with private money and closed off. Yes, it was a parking lot. But it was a public parking lot.
That means sometimes these kinds of developments don't happen and you can argue either way. Lucas got a little pushy about how he wanted the museum to be developed and also turned down alternate sites. So he took his ball and left and that's okay too.
Nope. None of the frivolous NIMBY lawsuits ever made it to trial, nor was the museum ever a defendant in any of them (it was the city being sued for approving it). I don't see what you gain from misrepresenting this years after the fact.
The city could've gone to trial for the one case you're referencing, and would've won given enough money and time, but by that point the museum had already started investigating other locations.
Serves them right, it was obvious BS, likely cause the return on investment for frontier training is not there anymore. They didn't think through the implications of the "We're responsible stewards now" PR.
I don't know that I know that for sure. But I also won't be surprised.
One way that I think about it is to look at what's happening in a completely different regime to see how they approach AI safety. So looking at China, how do they balance safety against freedom to develop the technology and how does it compare to our (US) approach?
(I think of China, not Europe, because there's not much AI innovation coming out of Europe so they don't need to navigate the tension to same degree as the US and China).
From the government side, the approach is mostly to monitor the situation and deal with risks as they arise, e.g. version 3.0 of the AI Safety Governance Framework https://www.tc260.org.cn/tc260/xwdt1/202609/e879077a3caa4722... was just released this month, now also covering "unintended autonomous behaviors."
I believe a temperance movement is on the horizon. The fact that we've turned smartphones into vice dispensers (and surveillance devices but that's another topic) is one of the greatest failures of western society.
It's telling when the largest maker of these devices themselves put societal controls in place to curb the excesses of this device - yet they're failing miserably too. Or are they? Perhaps the result is also what they want internally.
What social controls? Apple and Google get a cut of all the business that runs through their apps, including gambling apps. This has been the subject of numerous lawsuits.
You don't think the Play Store or the App Store are just giving out those apps and not making money from it, do you?
The app platforms are not only complicitous, they're enabling gambling by allowing these apps at all. It would be very simple to take them all away with TOS that banned gambling apps.
Maybe they learned from their blunder with the ID Buzz. At this point though I simply don't trust any legacy automaker when it comes to producing and supporting EVs for their lifetime.
Would it work as well, though? The basic idea of "degrowth", to me, is to slow down the car until the braking distance is smaller than the viewing distance, so we're safe no matter what. Whereas technology is more like swerving constantly to avoid obstacles. The latter is just intrinsically more likely to get us into a crash.
I'm not saying degrowth is feasible, mind you. I agree that it probably isn't. But the fact we can't do something doesn't mean the alternatives must be good. It might just mean we're cooked.
No country will ever vote for degrowth so it either has to be done secretively which will cause a populist backlash like in the UK or at gun point. Degrowthers are IMO all basically eco fascists.
The reality of the situation is if you don’t embrace degrowth principles, the planet will probably do it for you. Think mega-wildfores that cause so much devastation that hundreds of thousands of people die from air pollution, or collapse of entire crops and food supply chains due to drought, or mega-heatwaves that wipe out millions.
Degrowth is coming. And you don’t have a say in the matter.
Most of these large wildfires are started by people and a result of bad land management in the form of stopping small fires in fire adapted landscapes. Moreover meddling in insurance markets and NIMBYism causes people to build in burn zones.
There just aren’t mega heatwaves causing famines and there won’t be at 1.5c of warming either.
None of that changes that we now have substantially larger and less controllable fires than we used to. Are you really denying that extreme weather and droughts don’t play a part in dramatically increasing combustibility?
> There just aren’t mega heatwaves causing famines and there won’t be at 1.5c of warming either.
Clearly heat and droughts are an issue and contributing factor, but land use is easily controllable relative to atmospheric CO2.
> Oh we’re going way past 1.5C.
Are we? The IPCC projects that no change in public policy or tecchnological advancement globally has us on track fro 2.6C rise by 2100, but there's a straightforward path to 1.8C. Experts no longer think the old worst case scenarios are plausible. Yes, 2.6C is nothing to scoff at, but it's in the realm of adaptable.
Honestly, even though that's the only thing I've seen Tim Curry in, it's so strong that he has a fond place in my heart just for that performance. Dude knew how ridiculous it was and was having fun, which is a delight. It's hilarious to me watching him try to keep from cracking up in that scene.
i went to the symphony last year to see the movie Clue. the symphony played the music while the movie played on the big screen above. i’d never seen the movie, he was as amazing as everything else i’d seen him in.
At the end of the day I think if people find the use of AI charming/effective to resurrect dead celebrities they will go along with it. This sounds like a horrible tv show/use case but by and large audiences just want to be entertained and will accept "ghoulish" resurrections if it is entertaining. Darth Vader's voice will be around for quite a bit longer for example.
reply