• 0 Posts
  • 582 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle

















  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todaytoFuck AI@lemmy.worldEfficency
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    You now seem to be fairly clear you’re talking about the former, largely doable and indeed mostly implemented case.

    Quite the reverse, actually. That “dynamic” environment hosted by a separate service is not nearly as significant as you portray it. The entire point of a meeting is for every observer to share the same experience.

    Again, it is completely trivial for the underlying AI to recognize it has been asked to sit in on the same meeting, and act as the personal representative for each of 25 separate people.

    If you’re under the impression that there is a personal, private relationship between an individual and an AI instance, I suggest you disabuse yourself of that notion. If there is any distinction, it is only because the underlying AI has been instructed to schizophrenically simulate it.



  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todaytoFuck AI@lemmy.worldEfficency
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    I see absolutely no reason why they should invest time in rearchitecting the conceptual boundaries of how private a user’s interaction with an AI is.

    Profit.

    If AIs use as much power and resources as we’ve been led to believe, there are massive cost savings to be had by simulating multiple bots instead of using multiple bots. If they’ve budgeted to earn a profit from the operation of 25 independent bots, what are they earning by running only one and claiming it is 25?

    There is very little chance that this degree of optimization hasn’t been employed.