←back to thread

LLM Inevitabilism

(tomrenner.com)
1619 points SwoopsFromAbove | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
keiferski ◴[] No.44568304[source]
One of the negative consequences of the “modern secular age” is that many very intelligent, thoughtful people feel justified in brushing away millennia of philosophical and religious thought because they deem it outdated or no longer relevant. (The book A Secular Age is a great read on this, btw, I think I’ve recommended it here on HN at least half a dozen times.)

And so a result of this is that they fail to notice the same recurring psychological patterns that underly thoughts about how the world is, and how it will be in the future - and then adjust their positions because of this awareness.

For example - this AI inevitabilism stuff is not dissimilar to many ideas originally from the Reformation, like predestination. The notion that history is just on some inevitable pre-planned path is not a new idea, except now the actor has changed from God to technology. On a psychological level it’s the same thing: an offloading of freedom and responsibility to a powerful, vaguely defined force that may or may not exist outside the collective minds of human society.

replies(15): >>44568532 #>>44568602 #>>44568862 #>>44568899 #>>44569025 #>>44569218 #>>44569429 #>>44571000 #>>44571224 #>>44571418 #>>44572498 #>>44573222 #>>44573302 #>>44578191 #>>44578192 #
ygritte ◴[] No.44568862[source]
> the actor has changed from God to technology

Agreed. You could say that technology has become a god to those people.

replies(2): >>44571160 #>>44578223 #
1. xpe ◴[] No.44571160[source]
What technology? Agriculture? The steam engine? The automobile? Modern medicine? Cryptography? The Internet? LLMs? Nanotechnology?

Who are these people? Jonas Salk, widely credited as the inventor of the polio vaccine? Sam Altman, fundraiser extraordinaire? Peter Thiel, exalter of The World-Saving Founders? Ray Kurzweil? Technocrats? Other techno-optimists? Perhaps transhumanists? There are many variations, and they differ by quite a lot.

What kind of god? Carl Sagan has a nice interview where he asks a question-asker to define what they mean by “god”. A blind watchmaker? Someone who can hear your prayers? A wrathful smoter of the wicked and (sometimes) the loyal (sorry, Job!)? A very confusing 3-tuple, one element of which birthed another, who died somehow but was resurrected? The essence of nature? The laws of physics? An abstract notion of love? Yeah. These three letters are too vague to be useful unless unpacked or situated in a mutually understood context. It often fosters a flimsy consensus or a shallow disagreement.