Skip to main content

lemmy - Link to source

Palantir CEO Makes Shocking Confession on Disrupting Democratic Power

Palantir CEO Makes Shocking Confession on Disrupting Democratic Power

They’re saying the quiet part out loud now.
The New Republic
#technology
in reply to Chris Remington

MercuryCreativeWriterScrew
mastodon - Link to source
MercuryCreativeWriterScrew
• •
he said that AI is going to hurt women and help working class males? This is just rubbish, it’s not a shocking confession. Working class males? I think you’re referring to service production jobs and those are not increasing based on AI. So the CEO is trying to appeal to them by throwing women on a burning cross as usual. If men would stop agreeing to sacrifice women, we would be a much more powerful force of proletariat. And we don’t want AI to be in charge of us
in reply to MercuryCreativeWriterScrew

Canaconda
lemmy - Link to source
Canaconda
• •
Malcolm Ferguson wrote the title for this article not @remington.
This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to MercuryCreativeWriterScrew

ɔiƚoxɘup
lemmy - Link to source
ɔiƚoxɘup
• •
Same ol' divide and conquor, and they'll fall for it. They'll also continue to fund AI development until it works as well as the shills say it does. It's closer that than we think, too close for comfort.
in reply to Chris Remington

Powderhorn
lemmy - Link to source
Powderhorn
• •
I'd not have put the clickbait "shocking" in the hed, but regardless, we're running out of things to take off. Masks, gloves ... they want us totally naked, and preferably underage.
in reply to Powderhorn

Bluegrass_Addict
lemmy - Link to source
Bluegrass_Addict
• •
maybe heads will be next..
in reply to Bluegrass_Addict

ShellMonkey
piefed - Link to source
ShellMonkey
• •

I know! Let's take off our heads!

in reply to Powderhorn

XLE
piefed - Link to source
XLE
• •
I half agree with you and @Mercurial@todon.nl – the "shocking" part is mostly that he would pitch this directly in public, but the "confession" part is more of an offer or a wish
in reply to Powderhorn

Canaconda
lemmy - Link to source
Canaconda
• •
Malcolm Ferguson wrote the title for this article not @reminington.
in reply to Canaconda

Powderhorn
lemmy - Link to source
Powderhorn
• •
I'm aware. I was referring to the initial editorial judgment by the pub.
in reply to Chris Remington

MoogleMaestro
lemmy - Link to source
MoogleMaestro
• •

I like the idea that they think that educated jobs only belong to women. That's an interesting thought.

The sad truth is that this shit isn't going to replace "highly educated" jobs, and that the AI gravy train will end once people start to enforce basic intellectual property enforcement. Time is ticking, and the market taking a hit now is making them scramble.

in reply to MoogleMaestro

Powderhorn
lemmy - Link to source
Powderhorn
• •
Given that copy desks were being gutted more than a decade ago just with little things like Grammarly, it absolutely will replace knowledge jobs. It won't be better, but it will mean more share buybacks.
in reply to Powderhorn

GenderNeutralBro
lemmy - Link to source
GenderNeutralBro
• •

It doesn't need to be good to replace jobs, as long as there are no consequences for the people making those decisions.

I've lost count of how many "oops, it was AI's fault, not my fault!" stories I've heard, even within highly regulated fields. Like, lawyers submitting documents with completely fake citations, and then...no real consequences. Seems to me like that should be cause for immediate disbarment, but no, apparently not.

in reply to GenderNeutralBro

stravanasu
lemmy - Link to source
stravanasu
• •

The lack of consequences has been a problem for quite a while now, from before LLMs. In my opinion it's been caused by a widespread increase in professional incompetence, together with a mutually protective network of incompetent people. "I won't point out that you're incompetent and won't blame you for your mistakes, if you do me the same favour".

They call it "imposter syndrome", but it isn't a syndrome: it's a symptom.

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to stravanasu

kibiz0r
lemmy - Link to source
kibiz0r
• •

Indeed: Everything was already AI

This has been a very long project — separating conduct from consequences, in order to maximize profit. AI is just a breakthrough tool for doing it.

- YouTube

Bekijk je favoriete video's, luister naar de muziek die je leuk vindt, upload originele content en deel alles met vrienden, familie en anderen op YouTube.
youtube.com
This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to GenderNeutralBro

I_am_10_squirrels
lemmy - Link to source
I_am_10_squirrels
• •
I'm a licensed professional engineer and was working on evaluating some claims for a client. When I was done, my results were sent to the PR arm of the company. The PR people tried to use CoPilot to redo my work and make the claims language. Their results were full of hallucinated errors with no supporting evidence. The project manager was not happy.
in reply to Chris Remington

Sharkticon
lemmy - Link to source
Sharkticon
• •
You know in certain animal groups when a member of the herd or whatever becomes a danger to the rest of the group, say through some kind of disease or injury or increased aggression or mental issue, that heard will eliminate the threat to the herd.
in reply to Chris Remington

TehPers
lemmy - Link to source
TehPers
• •
if we don’t do it, our adversaries will do it


"If I don't stab you, someone else will. Therefore I have an obligation to stab you." - crazed mass stabber

in reply to Chris Remington

its_me_xiphos
lemmy - Link to source
its_me_xiphos
• •

Take anything Palantir says about democracy as either a dog whistle or a threat. Palantirs product is mass surveillance and criminal behavior prediction (location, whereabouts, movement patterns). That's authoritarian, but not necessarily antidemocratic. You can still vote and be a democracy with mass (edit: typo was with ass survelliance...might still work) surveillance, don't conflate it.

Where the anti Democratic comes in is using that surveillance to prevent people from exercising their right to vote and manipulating their information so they vote how you want. That's what Palantir is enabling.

Aside: Its nuts how accurate their name is in spirit. Almost commendable they carried through embracing the name and the power behind it.

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to ɔiƚoxɘup

its_me_xiphos
lemmy - Link to source
its_me_xiphos
• •

That's a good read, thank you for sharing. I do not believe that a lack of privacy and surveillance are a given. You can have a strong Democratic state with surveillance, if you have strong privacy guarantees and the means to enforce them. I'll point to the, for the time, rapidly expanding surveillance state of revolutionary America in the 1770s and 1780s for that, but I admit, this is a much larger discussion, but your article and point are well taken.

Edit: Update based on additional thoughts and comments below. This reply is to the perspectives and argument offered by /u/euxotic and my response is: "Circling around to say I thought about this over the last four days. In brief, my perspective that you can have a surveillance apparatus and a contemporary democracy in the 21st century were misguided. You are right."

This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to its_me_xiphos

ɔiƚoxɘup
lemmy - Link to source
ɔiƚoxɘup
• •

I might be able to agree with you if they hadn't already said that it's basically being misused and I'm talking about the people using it, not some crackpot or tin foil hat person. Also, the case for its necessity and its utility is very flimsy. Looke into snowden. Look into flock cameras. If you can even scratch the surface on those two topics and come back with the same argument... Well, then I just don't know what to do with you. lol

You can put in whatever safeguard you want, but there will still be people that will misuse it, and they won't get caught. That's what's already been happening with the levels of surveillance that we've already had since 2001, and even more so in 2004 with the Patriot Act.

In many ways, it's already too late and it has been proven that what we have already has not not been handled responsibly.

in reply to its_me_xiphos

ɔiƚoxɘup
lemmy - Link to source
ɔiƚoxɘup
• •

Thank you.

I probably could have been a little bit more succinct and just said "past is prologue, QED, you are incorrect."

in reply to ɔiƚoxɘup

its_me_xiphos
lemmy - Link to source
its_me_xiphos
• •
Circling around to say I thought about this over the last four days. In brief, my perspective that you can have a surveillance apparatus and a contemporary democracy in the 21st century were misguided. You are right.
in reply to its_me_xiphos

ɔiƚoxɘup
lemmy - Link to source
ɔiƚoxɘup
• •

This is the first I've seen or heard of this kind of reversal on the internet.

.. Of course it was on bee haw!

Thanks for following up.

Stay safe out there.

in reply to Chris Remington

Hirom
lemmy - Link to source
Hirom
• •
The only justification you could possibly have would be that if we don’t do it, our adversaries will do it. And we will be subject to their rule of law.…


Quick, undermine democratic values and rule of law before someone else does!

⇧