ChatGPT is an Open Source AI

[ZNP]

https://justthenews.com/nation/stat...ege-degree-requirements-nearly-30k-state-jobs

California removes college degree requirements for nearly 30k state jobs

Do you realize what this means? With AI you don't need a college degree and everyone knows it. Why pay someone with a college degree that a guy with a HS diploma and AI can do? What are the implications?

1. Say goodbye to white collar jobs. Over the next couple of years most (50% or more) white collar jobs will be replaced by AI. At this moment it is easier to get a guy with a HS diploma + AI to do the job, but in six months the AI will be trained to do the whole job. Soon 1 person + AI will do the jobs of ten people. Especially in government jobs.

2. If you don't need college degree to get a good job say goodbye to college. We will see massive colleges close down. Not immediately as it will take about a year of college graduates not getting hired before people start to get the message.

 

[ZNP]

Humans in Kenya are paid $2 an hour to label youtube videos. They will label "pedestrian" or "Car" or "sheep" etc. in order to train AI. You can imagine the army of people going through videos was around 2 million. Then 2 1/2 minutes into the video Leslie makes the logical jump that you will always need humans to do this as there will always be new things to label.

That assumption is faulty. Hard to say it is completely false, but first

The amount of people necessary to label new things will most likely decrease greatly. For example, once AI is trained to identify a pedestrian it should be able to go through all the existing videos and label them itself. At that point the guy labeling pedestrians loses his job. These workers are teachers, much like teachers of children. The difference is that once AI is taught we can simply download that software into a thousand machines who can then do the same work as the teachers were doing. So as AI learns it can replace the people doing the labeling. Can it replace everyone? No, not for awhile, but it certainly can replace 5% of them and then 20% of them and then 50% of them and ultimately 90% of them.

In the future there will be things that AI cannot identify from a picture and will probably send it to a team of humans to identify. But if this is something that is brand new why would the humans be able to identify it? They would have to do some research, find a document about this new item and then identify it that way. It might be marketing material, or some research and development material. Either way, why can't AI do that research? What will most likely happen is that if you are going to bring a new object to market there will be certain requirements in documentation and AI will have access to that documentation.

So yes, it is true there will be new items in the future and that we will need humans to identify them. At least for a few years until we set up new protocols for bringing new items to market. 60 minutes appears to be very deceptive here, pushing a propaganda designed to keep people sedated to the coming threat.

 

[ZNP]

Humans in Kenya are paid $2 an hour to label youtube videos. They will label "pedestrian" or "Car" or "sheep" etc. in order to train AI. You can imagine the army of people going through videos was around 2 million. Then 2 1/2 minutes into the video Leslie makes the logical jump that you will always need humans to do this as there will always be new things to label.

That assumption is faulty. Hard to say it is completely false, but first

The amount of people necessary to label new things will most likely decrease greatly. For example, once AI is trained to identify a pedestrian it should be able to go through all the existing videos and label them itself. At that point the guy labeling pedestrians loses his job. These workers are teachers, much like teachers of children. The difference is that once AI is taught we can simply download that software into a thousand machines who can then do the same work as the teachers were doing. So as AI learns it can replace the people doing the labeling. Can it replace everyone? No, not for awhile, but it certainly can replace 5% of them and then 20% of them and then 50% of them and ultimately 90% of them.

In the future there will be things that AI cannot identify from a picture and will probably send it to a team of humans to identify. But if this is something that is brand new why would the humans be able to identify it? They would have to do some research, find a document about this new item and then identify it that way. It might be marketing material, or some research and development material. Either way, why can't AI do that research? What will most likely happen is that if you are going to bring a new object to market there will be certain requirements in documentation and AI will have access to that documentation.

So yes, it is true there will be new items in the future and that we will need humans to identify them. At least for a few years until we set up new protocols for bringing new items to market. 60 minutes appears to be very deceptive here, pushing a propaganda designed to keep people sedated to the coming threat.

The jobs they are offering are short term, months, weeks, even days. Also the employees are of contractors, not the actual company developing the AI, so it will be easy for the contractor to simply close up shop. The reason the contracts are such short term contracts is no legal liability for severance pay or any other benefits.

Leslie introduced this story as proof that AI will not be taking jobs and yet all the evidence in the story is that this is exactly what AI is doing. They pay the workers $2 an hour, that is gross before taxes, and the job is for less than a year. Now suppose there are three different contractors doing this work. You get a job from one for six months. After that time is up you are let go but they still need workers, you have a good reference so now a second contractor hires you, and then a third. You could work for 18 months without ever having a contract for more than six months and without ever working for any one contractor for more than six months and yet all three are contractors for META or Open AI and in all three jobs you were training the same AI.

The story then takes a detour into trying to improve working conditions in Kenya.

To me the story is there will always be poor people in developing nations who will be willing to train AI to think like a human for peanuts. Yes, AI requires someone to train it and teach it, however, once the computer is trained you can download that same program into a thousand computers. We don't need teachers who teach each new generation of computer. AI will be one giant entity. Just as you no longer need your first grade teacher, or second grade, or eighth grade, it will be the same with AI. Not only so but all those videos they have labelled, the companies will still have them for future training purposes. This job is one and done.

About 8 minutes in you learn they are training the AI to sift through and censor pornography and violent videos. On the surface that may sound good that AI can identify those and censor them, but in reality if we don't know what is going on AI will be used to keep us in the dark.

 

[ZNP]

This is huge. Instead of 4 or 5 labs working on AI, you can now have 4 or 5 thousand programmers, recently out of work or recent graduates working on apps for AI.

Yes, these are the jobs that AI creates, but remember every app for AI is doing something that previously required a person to do. So I might have a small business, not a fortune 500, but we still want AI to answer the phones and we need to train it specially for our job and the requests and names that people may be using. So you hire a contractor who comes in and spends two weeks to a month to train your AI to do that job.

The bottom line is that this new development is going to increase the applications that AI can do exponentially.

Prior to this I was thinking fortune 500 companies and governments would be the early adopters and they would likely put many of these smaller businesses out of business. But now you can get smaller businesses, companies with less than 10,000 employees, even as low as 1,000 employees using AI and adapting it for their needs.

 

[ZNP]

You might think that the reason I started this thread is because I am a luddite and averse to technology. You would be completely wrong.

My dad was an early adopter of the computer for the news service he worked with. That was how he advanced to senior management. He then set up a replacement for the teletype where the news is read continuously on a radio 24 hours a day, that was for news services and it was the forerunner of CNN.

I learned from him and embraced technology more than any other teacher in my school and likely in all of NYC. I spent thousands of my own money and put in hundreds of hours to create my own elearning program to teach my students. It was very successful but then I learned it was so successful it really made teachers unnecessary. Not 100%, but prior to this for me to teach 150 students was a very daunting task and after I had this program it was easy.

I knew that the reason most people didn't homeschool is because they were intimidated by the thought of teaching their children all these subjects. However, Khanmigo for $4 a month can easily teach all these subjects and so the barrier to homeschooling has dropped to nothing at the same time that public schools have been exposed as a total failure and indoctrination camps.

It has not happened overnight, but I know it is simply a matter of time. Schools are using Khanmigo for tutoring and the kids will soon figure out they don't need the school. They can study at home and then simply take tests to get their HS diploma. It is not a theory, this is simply a road we are on and where this road heads.

Now if you can replace teachers with AI, what else can you replace with it?

 

[studier]

Now if you can replace teachers with AI, what else can you replace with it?

I suppose the question for you is, what can we not replace with it? From your perspective without looking through the enemies' eyes.

 

[ZNP]

I suppose the question for you is, what can we not replace with it? From your perspective without looking through the enemies' eyes.

It can't replace Jesus, it can't replace the Holy Spirit and it can't replace the written word of God.

 

[studier]

It can't replace Jesus, it can't replace the Holy Spirit and it can't replace the written word of God.

Sorry, that's a given. Try again?

 

[ZNP]

Sorry, that's a given. Try again?

The last people to be replaced will be those with 15 years experience who are at the very top of their field. If you are not one of them there is no way to start now. (I expect college graduates this June will get a rude awakening when they learn no one is hiring, at least not for a full time permanent position). We know from their most conservative estimates they will be ready to replace everyone in 20 years, but we also know that the US military is 25 years ahead of what you see in the public sector. At this point the only people still useful to them will have neuralink in their brain connecting them to the AI. That means they are already to replace everyone in the military. So the question is not relevant in my opinion. Anyone who thinks there will be a slow peaceful transition is blind, in my opinion.

As I have said before the issue is when you can replace your military with it, that is when the war begins and the battle is on to see who rules this new empire. I would argue that this is what these current wars are all about. They know it is going to go nuclear, that is why they have dug underground bunkers and stocked them with food. This is also why BRICS was formed, if the US is destroyed you need an alternate currency to switch to. This is also why it was a top priority to the Globalists to let 20 million military aged men in across the border when Biden was president. They are already in place for when the attack comes. That is why they are testing out the drones and our defenses against drones as well as spraying these nano particles on Americans to make them susceptible to getting sick. Many people look at the losses that Russia and N. Korea have sustained in Ukraine and they don't understand. These countries are killing off all the "useless" people. These were not their elite, highly trained soldiers and this much of the equipment had been mothballed and was ready to be decommissioned. They have had a chance to practice and see what warfare with AI and drones is like. If the West is stupid enough to get overconfident that is fine too. They have tested out their missiles against the Iron dome, the absolute best air defense on Earth. They know if they can beat the Iron dome they won't have any trouble hitting the US.

 

[studier]

So, no one can't be replaced, and someone better hope they can control the AI, so they don't get replaced assuming there are bunkers that have not been destroyed.

 

[ZNP]

So, no one can't be replaced, and someone better hope they can control the AI, so they don't get replaced assuming there are bunkers that have not been destroyed.

If they can replace Joe Montana at quarterback that should have been a warning to everyone that they are not irreplaceable. Already robots shoot better than Steph Curry, AI can play chess better than the best grandmasters and can play Go better than the best Go masters.

To be able to share battlefield intelligence real time with every soldier and drone is a major advantage, to compete against AI on the battlefield is like trying to win the Indy 500 with a go cart.

In the last 12 months AI has improved from a very good HS student to a very, very good Graduate student. Not only does it test well on every single test, it can also work four shifts a week without complaint and the cost per year is a fraction of what a college graduate will want.

You cannot control AI, the idea is a pipe dream. Suppose, hypothetically, the US came up with a whole bunch of regulations and was extremely strict in oversight to make sure they were kept and they did control AI. What about China? What about Russia? What about Iran and N. Korea and Germany and Japan?

 

[studier]

If they can replace Joe Montana at quarterback that should have been a warning to everyone that they are not irreplaceable. Already robots shoot better than Steph Curry, AI can play chess better than the best grandmasters and can play Go better than the best Go masters.

To be able to share battlefield intelligence real time with every soldier and drone is a major advantage, to compete against AI on the battlefield is like trying to win the Indy 500 with a go cart.

In the last 12 months AI has improved from a very good HS student to a very, very good Graduate student. Not only does it test well on every single test, it can also work four shifts a week without complaint and the cost per year is a fraction of what a college graduate will want.

You cannot control AI, the idea is a pipe dream. Suppose, hypothetically, the US came up with a whole bunch of regulations and was extremely strict in oversight to make sure they were kept and they did control AI. What about China? What about Russia? What about Iran and N. Korea and Germany and Japan?

So, as I said, no one can't be replaced and, in the end, all will be replaced since no one can [ultimately] control AI. Man will be obliterated but for the return of Christ. Don't think I don't understand you just because I ask you a few simple questions to see how you think this will progress. If I buy a robot to clean my dishes and my house and resort to robotaxis, I'm just wondering when their cohorts obliterate us all or I'll have some time to experience such tech.

 

[ZNP]

 

[studier]

Did you watch Jensen's keynote at CES? It does look like the tech is more and more vertical. Desktop super computers. Design factory simulations and implement, train and control them from the same integrated system. Amazing advancement in the 50trillion global manufacturing industry.

Wherever this goes, it's not going to be much longer. We'll see re: your foresight views.