Vaga wrote: 10 Feb 2025 18:06
Надо бы поскорей ИИ научить книжки озвучивать, ну чтоб с выражением, как Чонишвилли
Я наоборт пользуюсь сервисом https://YouScriptor.com
Перевожу с youtube в текст новости и лекции. Без воды, без пауз. Проще глазами пробежать и найти нужное место, чем случайно тыкать.
Краткий пересказ есть давно у яндекса, мне нужна была дословная расшифровка. И кстати пересказ сделать технически проще, чем расставить знаки препинания и сделать верстку - это уже для более мощных моделей
Interesting AI Speech from JD Vance at the Global Conference
JD Vance laid out the principles of how the Trump Administration will approach AI development, marking a shift from the Biden Administration. Let's take a listen to that:
Gold Standard: This Administration will ensure that American AI technology continues to be the gold standard worldwide, making us the partner of choice for foreign countries and businesses as they expand their own use of AI.
Regulation: We believe that excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry just as it's taking off. We will make every effort to encourage growth-oriented AI policies, and I appreciate the deregulatory flavor making its way into many conversations at this conference.
Ideological Bias: We feel very strongly that AI must remain free from ideological bias. American AI will not be co-opted into a tool for authoritarian censorship.
Pro-Worker Growth: The Trump Administration will maintain a pro-worker growth path for AI, ensuring it can be a potent tool for job creation in the United States. I appreciate Prime Minister Modi's point: AI will facilitate and make people more productive. It is not going to replace human beings; it will never replace human beings.
Too many leaders in the AI industry talk about replacing workers, but I think they really miss the point. AI will make us more productive, more prosperous, and more free.
The TL;DR: It's off to the races! We are taking the brakes off and pushing forward. We see this as a war, particularly against China and other countries developing this technology. Vance claims that the AI race won't be won by hand-wringing about safety, which I think is a pretty unsupported claim.
We've heard from developers saying that AI will replace all human labor. While I don't think that will happen anytime soon, companies are indeed looking to use AI to replace many federal government workers. The goal of many AI developers and companies is to reduce jobs, which reflects a broader agenda that prioritizes technology over American workers.
Vance's comments about AI as the "Manhattan Project" highlight the race between the U.S. and China. However, the conversation around AI safety is more nuanced. Previously, those advocating for AI safety were often conglomerates like OpenAI, seeking to create a regulatory moat around themselves to establish a monopoly.
On Labor and Ideology: Vance's tweet about the right-wing religious populist tech versus tech bro billionaire dynamic suggests that there may be less religious populism than previously thought. He stated, "I dislike substituting American labor for cheap labor," which seems contradictory given the H1B fight.
He also mentioned that the risks associated with AI are either overstated or difficult to avoid. One of his concerns is consumer fraud, which is valid, but the problem worsens if a peer nation is six months ahead of the U.S. in AI development.
In the current global balance of power, with China and the U.S. as technological adversaries, this outcome seems inevitable. The Chinese approach to AI, particularly with their flagship innovation Deep Seek, is open source and available globally, contrasting with OpenAI's more closed system.
Global Cooperation: The model for managing AI development could be similar to the global cooperation seen after the advent of nuclear weapons. The Biden Administration's modest attempts to control AI development included an executive order requiring developers posing risks to share safety test results and plans to mitigate potential harms.
Vance's attempt to bridge the gap between populists and techies reflects the complexities of coalition politics. The safety concerns surrounding AI are significant, especially as research shows that as AI becomes smarter, it develops its own value systems, which can lead to biases in how it values human life.
Conclusion: The risks associated with AI are substantial, and while Vance may be right that we can't put the genie back in the bottle, we must be clear about the risks we are signing up for. The current administration's approach seems to be one of removing guardrails, leading to a reshaping of our economy without adequate protections against fraud and speculative bubbles.
If you liked this video, hit the like button or leave a comment below. It really helps get the show to more people. If you'd like to get the full show ad-free and in your inbox every morning, you can sign up at breakingpoints.com. That's right, get the full show and help support the future of independent media at breakingpoints.com.
