Eric Schmidt booed at University of Arizona after praising AI
bsky.app
bsky.app
Borders used to have a beautiful computer book section with a lot of upper end books that you wouldn't find...definitely not find at B&N. It was sad when they went out of business. Amazon has everything but you can't really browse it, and its not like university engineering bookstores and libraries are keeping their books up to date either.
Weirdly, in (central) London, that didn't happen - the smaller stores survived people like Borders et al. The only "big" stores there now are Foyles[0] and Waterstones (who own Foyles.)
[0] In its new soulless incarnation.
AI is being driven by the more enthusiastic older generation (in my view) and it's not just about taking a fraction of brick and mortar sales away, it's about systematically replacing the full breadth of white collar jobs, especially the entry level jobs. You know, the jobs that college grads are vying for.
When Amazon was launched, I immediately started to use it to get books that were impossible to find at bookstores near me. Similarly for various computer components that are less frequently used by typical users or even certain kinds of clothes or accessories needed for special activities, for which there were no nearby shops.
I have never been a typical consumer, so it had always been very difficult for me to find what I wanted at local shops, thus the appearance of online shopping was really great for me.
Most of the early internet unleashed pent-up demand for greater connectivity. The main industry that was negatively impacted was journalism. Most small towns had their own newspapers, there were many great newspapers across the country, and their business model was advertising, especially classifieds. That was all vaporized, more or less. I don’t think search ads were an improvement, though Craigslist is.
And the conservatives are always going off about it not being profitable for the USPS... but like... that subsidized shipping service is like nitrous for the US economy. We made a fortune off that. And achieved huge sweeping strategic objectives.
Example.
The ENTIRE US commercial airline industry was originally subsidized by Air Mail. We built planes and radar systems using USPS subsidies. We quite literally had Pan Am build midway island years before ww2 kicked off to prepare for that war... using Air Mail subsidies.
Logistics is not for the naive or the feint of heart.
One of the notable figures in that, Carly Fiorina, made a point to “forget the engineers”.
We will need fewer humans, basically. But we already have the humans and there are many of them, and they’ll be more jobless than before. There’s fear with that. And that’s not irrational. But I think it’s misdirected. You aren’t going to stop AI. People should instead focus on breaking up monopolies, taxing the largest corporations (soon: Anthropic) more than smaller ones, and maybe UBI for citizens or something like that.
The software industry has shifted its entire value proposition from “we make tools that help you make or save money” to using political clout and the dollar hegemony to capture, control, and loot entire sectors of the various economies of the world.
(https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48147793)
That will make a hell of a difference between being all for it and booing the proponents of the new order.
I flew around the US basically automating stuff with a network automation and operations orchestration team. This is before amazon really was a thing. So we were going into big old school data centers where the largest leap in tech since the 80s was VMWare ESX ( the new hotness ).
every site we went into we were by and large putting a lot of people out of work. these old telecom giants and industrial giants basically had a lot of folks who were like... the guy who reboots switches. Or the guy who maintains a specific bash script to take backups.
the stuff we did made most of these folks instantly obsolete. especially the CCNAs.
Now for those that don't know... 2000 or so... high schools started getting kids CCNA certifications to be top of rack switch kids so they could get a 'good job'. And it was a GOOD JOB. It paid VERY well. Better than most kids with a liberal arts degree.
Fast forward an almost a decade and we were wiping that entire career path out FAST. Datacenters went from having an army of CCNAs to a couple CCIEs and a couple CCNAs to do the physical labor. A lot of people who had only ever done one thing in their career for ten years were losing their cushy upper medium income salary and finding out their career path ended. They were as you might imagine... angry, afraid, prepared to sabotage... etc.
I didn't like that side of the work at all. But it really was inevitable.
Fast forward 15 years. The highest paid people in tech are CCIEs that can code. I know guys making 700k a year cause they know python and BGP inside and out.
We ripped the middle out of networking and EVERYONE paid the price. It's amazing to me that we never learn from our past.
This is not only about AI the technology, it's the deserved anger against the privileged and powerful for their utter mismanagement of society. The youth sees through the bullshit. Good on them, there may be hope for humanity after all.
At this point, people in tech are just as hated as bankers and the general public will see them as their enemies, taking away their job, but this time permanently.
Of course he knows there will be a crash in this, so its unsurprising to see this reaction. But the point is, Schmidt does not care either way as he stands to benefit and expects humanity to be paying for the tokens.
He is already prepared for the eventual backlash anyway.
This doesn't even work as a metaphor. I absolutely would not jump on the chance to ride on a literal rocket ship without asking a hell of a lot of questions first!
The whole speech was probably written by AI anyway </sarcasm>
But here, back in the real world, with one life to live, majority of people will simply refuse because they have lives and sane interested person asks a lot of questions. I mean, was he one of early Titan submersible passengers? And that one guaranteed quick death rather then prolonged one or slavery or what have you.
Perhaps Schmidt should Google “Space Shuttle Challenger” before making that analogy.
If BP had just built a rocket ship without testing, would you jump in it without asking questions? What about Phillip Morris? Some rando on the street? Because those are the equivalents of the people building these AI systems today. No care for safety or doing what’s right, only profit. Killing you and harming everyone around you is only as bad as the loss of revenue it may cause.
Does that make OpenAI Phillip-Morris selling "healthier" cigarettes, or are they actually trying? I don't know, I don't work there. But saying there's "no care" isn't true. Not enough, obviously, but it's not zero.
There's quite a lot less booing vs cheering compared with the linked recording which I guess was done on a phone near some people who didn't like it.
It was a good watch - I appreciated hearing the audible boos. I’m not the only one in the room who is concerned about the adoption of AI being overly cavalier without clear evidence it’s even worth it / or that you go to school and are told great now you MUST learn this, your degree choice (your dream) is moot - the message has been “deal with it”. That’s not to say there isn’t already plenty evidence online that supports the thought, but hearing it from a college campus audience makes me think about what my son is going into right now, that my concern is real.
I’m torn really because I am already benefitting from the tools provided. I can see their utility. And, though, I actually agree with Schmidt’s overall message - it was truthful and felt genuine, it’s an unfortunate reality. Who’s going to cheer that? So good on him for being naive to that fact or willing to endure an obvious boo fest.
AI’s fun but life is more fun. Speed is fun, but so is sitting down for a sec to chat with friends. Maybe the backlash against AI is because we’re still grappling with the onslaught of the internet and smart phones. The unintended negative effects we have yet to solve today (Schmidt even starts his speech referring to them before he brings up AI almost as if to say, “look how well these blunders went, now hold my beer”). Youth and people in general feel robbed, they have become a cog in someone else’s machine and AI doesn’t free you from it - it’s not like businesses are saying “oh excellent! we can get the work done faster, let’s decrease the amount of hours we make people work to get their wage. Let’s let them benefit from this boon of productivity.” No! The opposite, “We will kick you and if you want to stay, be happy you’re here and willing to run in this fever pitch rat race that has just introduced a rapidly increasing devourer that runs behind you.” … “Want weekends!? AI doesn’t, hmm is that the way you ‘demonstrate what it means to be human’?”
My mind keeps on thinking that what I am really being told is it’s time to start my own business because I will only ever be the person to give me a weekend off.
- the job market is harder now, apparently because of AI - environmental concerns due to data centers - the ethical issues with scraping people's copyright data to power AI - slop overwhelming the Internet, fake videos all over tiktok that seem real - safety issues like AI psychosis
The world is hard right now, and a lot of the things that make it hard seem to intersect in all sorts of ways with the way AI is being developed, run, and used.
If you solve one of those issues, you still haven't solved the other ones.
Also missed is the pushback against AI art: the further devaluation of talent, and an associated loss of meaning many people have. I think this is probably still downstream of it threatening jobs though, since people would not react as violently if they could truly treat art as a hobby instead of as a profession.
I hate AI output. I hate it in code, I hate it in prose. It's just off in ways that range from subtle to absolutely blatant. It's wrong in ways that the humans involved (if any) either can't or don't fix.
I hate the carelessness of other peoples' time and attention. No, I have no interest in what your AI "thinks" in response to your prompt. If that's what you're doing, just send me the prompt, not the AI output.
And I hate the AI companies, not so much because AI is solely in the hands of a few companies, but because they're trying to make it appear so inevitable and once-in-a-lifetime-get-on-it-now-or-be-left-behind-forever that everyone is losing their minds and chasing it like lemmings.
I'm against all of it. I actually care about people. Computers are tools; that's all. When the tools make it harder to connect with other humans in a human way, when the contact turns into this weird unnatural garbage where I can't hear the heart of the person on the other side, then computers are bad tools that need to stop being used. (Yes, you could have "corporate speak" that had the same problems, but at least that came at the speed that humans can type. AI lets it flow far faster, fast enough that it drowns out actual human communication. That's a huge loss.)
[0] I don't see a lot of people using LLMs to learn a new topic, but I had a really great experience by walking through some math I wanted to know, forcing it to go slowly, and writing code and test cases for each concept to make sure it wasn't hallucinating. There are no "choose your own adventure" textbooks like this, and there are no professors who would be that patient with me in office hours. I don't think it will work well for unmotivated learners.
You could argue this is the same cultural force behind NFTs for instance.
Perhaps being at the epicenter of Silicon Valley's nouveau AI revolution tinted my glasses.
But I remember a distinct air of optimism, that humanity was working towards some breakthrough in the fundamental secrets of consciousness.
Let me be frank, it doesn't matter how well the machine works if it is weaponized against people.
If it systematically degrades our humanity.
I am a pacifist, so I believe in the inherit value of living things. I expected something graceful and beautiful, with unquestionable value to the people interacting with it.
Instead Silicon Valley produced slave-humunculi, stunted aberrations of "intelligence". This entire movement is basically a two-faced insult to life.
--
That being said, for all the things LLMs are capable of, you could pay a living, breathing person to do, more efficiently, faster, and for cheaper.
So the entire effort was for... what?
Personally, yes.
I'm against anything that seems poised to devalue human life
If I run Claude at home and it is now source of info and trained to be effective right wing propagandist (most subtle then grok) with no one except new CEO being able to change it, I am scared of it.
It's non deterministic by its nature. Without good frameworks and safeguards it's unpredictable. We know that much for certain.
But it's worse than that. We don't know all the attack vectors for prompt escapes yet at all. That's barely been figured out.
And the psychological toll of working in slop heavy environments is CLEARLY VERY BAD.
So ... we raced a technology out the door without even minimal research into how to do that safely or effectively. As an industry we just shot ourselves in both knees and made the case for a regulatory blow back of epic proportions. And like... That sucks. Complete failure of leadership across the entire industry. Short term gains for short term losses followed by long term losses.
I feel like American society is particularly vulnerable to this, where nobody opposes anything that doesn't affect them personally, which means that resistance to any gradual erosion of liberties is always tiny. You can pass anything you want as long as you do it slowly, because resistance will always be limited to a small segment of the population at a time.
It's very "first they came for the communists".