Large Chainsaw Model

I believe the author is mistaken about why chainsaws don't cause more harm than they do. There are multiple of ways in which a chainsaw will kill or destroy, without any warning. Kickback is very quick. A tree falling in the wrong direction comes without warning.

Personally, I suspect there are 2 main reasons why chainsaws don't cause more harm.

A) They've been around for 100 years, and they've been causing fatalities and injuries for 100 years. People have invented ways to reduce the risk. Any chain you can readily buy is a low-kickback chain, and the saw comes with a chain brake. It doesn't completely remove the risk, but it substantially reduces it.

B) They've been around for 100 years, and they've been causing fatalities and injuries for 100 years. People are aware that chainsaws are inherently dangerous. Even someone without any training, and without looking at the safety instructions, understands that one of these will take off a limb without blinking.

What this means for the rest of the metaphor, I'm not sure.

"Early electrical systems were poorly insulated, and fires or electrocutions were common. The creation of standards for wiring, outlets, grounding systems, and circuit breakers took decades to develop." It could be that AI will develop so fast that society never catches up, but I'm sure we'll at least get better over time.

I wondered about this but it makes sense when you imagine trees as sentient. Chainsaws are extremely efficient killing machines for the most helpless and generous creatures on earth.

Even more so since I would assume more people die to car accidents then chainsaw accidents. But more people find cars useful to their day to day lives than chainsaws.

So I guess the question is whether these models are useful to everyone like cars, or just to a subset like chainsaws that still remains to be seen.

"We’re all mostly just regular people interacting with other regular people, trying to go about our business and get through our days. Nobody’s asking us to index and catalog entire libraries of information. Nobody really cares if we reuse a stock photo that somebody else might have used somewhere else at some point. We’re not so busy that we need everything predigested before it’s presented to us. We’re still clever enough to work our way through unfamiliar problems. Some of us, I would have to think, still possess the ability and the desire to produce some sort of output in our chosen medium without relinquishing creative control to AI."

both of those statements are false. While not common, some proiessional construction crews do use a chainsaw instead of a circular saw - the vast majority don't but some do. Likewise a trenching tool is just a chainsaw with a large blade - not the same chainsaw as you would use for a tree, put clearly a chainsaw if you look.

Surely, LLMs are professional tools as for now. Internet was for scientists in first days. GPUs were once for gamers. Then gamers and CAD/CGI professionals.

Today my phone uses gpu to show pretty unlock screen and internet is... internet. Most people don't even distinguish GPU and internet from their device.

My prediction: at current pace in 20 years average user won't even know if he is using local LLM on his device or not. It will be just how computers work. Very un-chainsowy, very inconspicuous, very 0 training required.

You can skip about half the article

> Language models are capable of producing and digesting substantial volumes of text. More text than any single person should ever be expected to handle in the course of a lifetime. Compared to the speed at which a human can read and write, these models are the linguistic equivalent of a chainsaw. It’s much the same with computer vision, and generative algorithms producing videos and images of events that never occurred and things that don’t exist.

It’s my belief that, in our current artificial intelligence boom’s haste to grab as much business as possible, we are essentially handing out chainsaws to unqualified and inexperienced people who don’t appreciate the responsibility entrusted to them, and who probably don’t require such power in the first place. And that is not the consumers’ fault—this is all on the companies that are pushing it into their laps.

> Some would say that, compared to the tangible hazards of losing a bodily extremity or dropping a pine trunk through the bedroom ceiling, misuse of AI by irresponsible or malicious actors sounds downright genteel. But think about how quickly memes and misinformation flow through social media and the larger internet. Whoever first used the word “viral” to describe such spread, they hit that nail right on the head.Social media craves that stuff, and AI provides the almost effortless ability to produce unlimited quantities of exactly what it desires. And the reward for the creator, as much as the users of an AI product can be called the “creator” of that content, is a shower of likes, reposts, updoots, badges, and the tiny dribble of dopamine brought by those things. Thus the system perpetuates itself.

> Unlike the venerable chainsaw, AI doesn’t give any indication that it is being misused. It doesn’t growl, shake, kick, or protest. It doesn’t even give a useful indication that “hey this result might be completely useless hogwash, I dunno.” The user doesn’t get to see what happens inside, or know precisely where the information originally came from, or evaluate how the model may have compromised reality to produce an output that looked plausibly like something a human would accept. It just hums along quietly, churning out line after line of approximately whatever it believed was asked of it.