• Vincent@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 days ago

      Reading the article, I think at least to oppose centralised players that DoS the internet, congest our electricity infrastructure and pollute the environment, and try to bypass democracy through regulatory capture. That captures quite a few of the dark sides of the current AI hype that I’m unhappy about, so let’s hope that works out.

      • eleijeep@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        How do they propose to fight bot-crawlers, environmental damage and regulatory capture by creating more AI?

        • Vincent@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          Steelmanning the argument, I’d say: you could outcompete the companies doing those things, e.g. by giving people AI that runs on their device and is ethically trained.

          It might seem hard to compete at the moment, but given that there’d be no costs to running them, I don’t think it’s necessarily impossible: even if the quality is lower, it’s very hard to beat free.

          Hopefully, if the OpenAIs of this world go bankrupt, they’ll stop hammering, say, OpenStreetMap.

        • XLE@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 days ago

          The only alternative to bad AI is, according to Mozilla, more AI. But good AI, wholesome AI. With more guardrails, so the stormtroopers stop falling off catwalks.

    • photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      The nonprofit, also the parent of Firefox, is investing in artificial intelligence startups that are working on safety and governance issues in AI.