for - AI - inside industry predictions to 2034 - Leopold Aschenbrenner - inside information on disruptive Generative AI to 2034

document description - Situational Awareness - The Decade Ahead - author - Leopold Aschenbrenner

summary - Leopold Aschenbrenner is an ex-employee of OpenAI and reveals the insider information of the disruptive plans for AI in the next decade, that pose an existential threat to create a truly dystopian world if we continue going down our BAU trajectory. - The A.I. arms race can end in disaster. The mason threat of A.I. is that humans are fallible and even one bad actor with access to support intelligent A.I. can post an existential threat to everyone - A.I. threat is amplifier by allowing itt to control important processes - and when it is exploited by the military industrial complex, the threat escalates significantly

• to - YouTube - 4 hour in-depth interview with Leopold Aschenbrenner on the disruptive and existential impacts of A.I. super-intelligence
  • https://hyp.is/zk8hdjEoEe-EIHtdo3U81w/www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdbVtZIn9IM

Comment by KamilaKuc: For the changing guises and forms of a book, see The Book Is Alive blog, which displays book 'as an evolving, open and visual medium' that is curated and alive, thus its shape and content can change.

Durch die globale Erhitzung wird in Europa das Gebiet, in dem Fichten angebaut werden können, um 50% abnehmen abnehmen. Ein neuer Bericht der internationalen Union der Organisationen zur Erforschung der Wälder zeigt, dass auch andere Baumarten, die als mögliche Alternativen galten, unter den veränderten klimatischen Bedingungen nur schwer überleben. https://www.derstandard.de/story/3000000211551/was-tun-wenn-uns-die-fichte-als-superbaum-wegstirbt

Bericht: https://teamingup4forests.com/wood-supply-study/

Löhr (2023) - Do socially disruptive technologies really change our concepts or just our conceptions? - https://is.gd/eaatZq - urn:x-pdf:ae4f6a169b2f28f10527a115f732a84f

!- Insight : thought sans image * the symbolically constructed personware continually validates itself * The living, spontaneous, present human INTERbeing can generate something new * "Thinking beyond the image of thought" may mean penetrating the existing automatized associations of thoughts with one that is quite novel and does not necessarily fit in, so is disruptive and can bring about a paradigm shift.

COMMENTARY: The U.S. anti-vax movement is contaminating Canada - National | Globalnews.ca. (n.d.). Global News. Retrieved 10 October 2021, from https://globalnews.ca/news/8187962/the-u-s-anti-vax-movement-is-contaminating-canada/

Let’s count them! And there’s something interesting about this contrast between experimentation and disruption. The latter may be about shifting profit centres. The former may be about learning.

Again, the theme of people fearing the potential consequences of disruptive media that has become absolutely essential to the flow of modern day life. This quote from Plato demonstrates that even the wisest among us sometimes can't see past their own nose. Yes, Plato correctly predicted that writing and literacy would lead to a decrease in memorization and a de-emphasis on the intellectual oral tradition. But if not for disruptive media, we would all be lounging in the Athenian agora like Plato, believing the sun revolved around the Earth.

Often times, the zenith of disruptive media brings with it exaggerated hysteria over the potential ill-effects of what it will do to our current forms of media. But these doomsday predictions never seem to come to pass. The television didn't kill the radio. Email didn't kill face-to-face human interaction, and neither did the telephone. Writing didn't kill knowledge. Many of these Luddites forget human agency, the ability of humans to balance media consumption and manage the emerging new forms of media with classic forms.

Rheingold begins this section called '(Using) the Internet Makes Us Stupid (or Not)' in order to promote restraint and emphasize the forgotten element in all of these negative predictions for disruptive media: choice.

One of Rheingold’s central rhetorical devices for building ethos in this introductory chapter is to highlight the now-laughable negative reactions to technology that has become irreplaceable to our daily lives. This article from Vaughn Bell in Slate is useful in amplifying Rheingold’s point, that the new digital forms of media are just the latest in a long tradition of disruptive media sources. Bell writes, “Worries about information overload are as old as information itself, with each generation reimagining the dangerous impacts of technology on mind and brain.”.In it, he mentions a long litany of naysayers against technologies like the printing press, the radio, and the television. Obviously all of these technologies have fostered human progress more than it has hindered it. I think this is the position Rheingold would take as well, that cries that the Internet is making us dumb or that social media is ruining our politics are huge overreactions to small kinks in a technology that’s benefits vastly outweigh its costs.

Is Google Making Us Stupid? - the Atlantic (this is an article that Rheingold references several times) https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/

Did Social Media Ruin Election 2016? - NPR http://www.npr.org/2016/11/08/500686320/did-social-media-ruin-election-2016

Sounds like a very quick summary of what Ben Thompson was saying two weeks ago. But, in this case, it’s from “the horse’s mouth”.

For the changing guises and forms of a book, see The Book Is Alive blog, which displays book 'as an evolving, open and visual medium' that is curated and alive, thus its shape and content can change.

The quotes are important. There are different approaches to innovation. The one described here may be pushed by politicians and administrators, but some would argue that it’s not innovation in the same sense as what either Eric Von Hippel or Michael Schragge might describe.

According to scholars like MIT’s Eric Von Hippel and Michael Schrage, innovation is about usage. Otherwise, it’s just novelty. But the innovation discourse often repurposes the term to be about R&D.

One linear model, represented in something of a spiral… Agreed that the transformative experience is tough to “disrupt”, but the whole “content delivery” emphasis shows that the disruption isn’t so quick.