• tengkuizdihar@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      why focus on money? what about culture, humanity, and actual interesting interaction between humans?

      ah, I forgot humanity have devolved into beings of statistics. Leaving feelings, positive long term planning, and religion behind.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 hours ago

        I believe it is an attempt to use an argument that they will care about. You could write a brilliant piece about how that many bots hurt culture and society but if the ones you want to convince don’t gaf about either of those, they probably won’t even read what you have to say, let alone change anything because of it.

        Or, more likely, they won’t even see anything here, at which point that comment becomes more of a “they aren’t even very good at what they want to be good at”.

        Like from my pov, the top of the corporate world doesn’t just not care about those things but is actively trying to destroy them because they think they’ll do better in a world where none of those things are as they currently are.

  • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    World governments will be delighted to find that they’ve driven their populations off of the internet. As much as they’ll hate being engaged in 24/7 automated cyber warfare to stop their power plants exploding.

  • tigermountain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    People are just going to get sick of the Internet, if they haven’t already, and start to look at it like a necessary evil they have to use to do certain things instead of what it once was which was fun and exciting. It’s sad.

        • cloudshouter@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Currently private users and enthusiasts. As networks grow, there will probably be universities joining. Eventually corporations will start marketing plug and play equipment while selling access to server space and long distance connections. Other businesses will join and finance their services by selling subscriptions, advertising, and user data. Various government agencies will add hardware they can also use to track traffic. Someone will inevitably bring in bots, AI models, and internet connected devices. After that someone will coin the term “dead mesh network theory” and all the nerdlings will start developing the next knitted network or something.

          • korazail@lemmy.myserv.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            24 hours ago

            The catalyst there is businesses (and to a degree governments).

            I used to pay attention to my physical mail. Then it was all “junk mail” and the signal-to-noise ratio got hard to manage.

            I migrated the important stuff to “electronic mail”, where I had a curated list of people and entities that sent me items, so I could focus on things that were important. Then my address/mailbox became common knowledge and that filled with “spam”.

            I started using SMS/text for the important stuff. But that also became a common place to send me stuff I didn’t care about, so I used specific apps on my phone that had permission to notify me when something needed attention, and now my phone gives me so many notifications I just ignore them all.

            Our attention is the prize, and it won’t matter where our attention goes: The businesses will follow.

            The same will hold true for connectivity. If the current internet becomes a wasteland and we migrate to Mesh, then it’s only a matter of time before corporate interests take that over too; then knitted, or fabric, or the glob.

            The solution will be protections for personal identity and privacy, which have been and will be fought tooth-and-nail by the companies because they want that info so they can be where our attention is so they can make profit. I think we can also fight the profit motive, but that’ll be harder than getting protections in law… so small steps.

    • motruck@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yep. The internet is becoming what a mailbox in real life is. An abused gateway that has a narrow set of legitimate uses.

    • WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      You won’t be able to tell which of your neighbours was replaced by a metal mimic, and got shipped off to the Soylent factory.

      Peter Thiel did mention humans will end up like horses, going to the glue factory.

    • NekoKoneko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well, if you were a billionaire who owned AI system trained to influence and extract money from humans, and there’s no humans online, what would you do?

      And so that brings us to how robots actually will become a reality…

    • Toribor@corndog.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      I had a realization recently that with driverless cars becoming more common that one day I’m going to be stuck in traffic surrounded by dozens of other cars that are completely empty. They’ll just be going to pick up a human driver somewhere or going to park and no one will care because instead of eliminating traffic we’ll just ensure humans are entertained while stuck in it.

      Why bother to fix traffic congestion if you can just play PlayStation the whole time or whatever?

      • eleitl@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        One day when you’re stuck in traffic, it will be all horsecarts. Which are also capable of bringing a drunk driver home.

      • percent@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        If most cars are autonomous, and capable of coordinating with each other (via mesh network, for example), then traffic congestion might become much easier to prevent and solve.

        You’re probably not wrong though. I imagine it’ll get worse before it gets better

        • group_hug@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Ha ha. Traffic will move to let billionaires through quickly.

          Regular folks will be stuck in endless traffic trapped in driverless cars that charge them $5 a minute for the privilege all while playing the same loud and obnoxious audio video ads on repeat for hours on end.

        • patatahooligan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          I don’t believe we will ever get coordinated autonomous vehicles. You will never be able to absolutely trust the information you are getting, whether it’s because wireless sucks, auto manufacturers couldn’t agree to or properly implement a universal standard, software bugs, or malicious behavior. If we want it to be safe, then the cars will have to drive cautiously and be prepared for behavior that was not properly communicated. This will not be a form of driving that is fundamentally different to what we have now.

          And even if you could implement perfect coordination between autonomous vehicles, how would you be able to take advantage of it in the real world? Ban all human drivers? What about pedestrians and bikes? You still need crossings and traffic lights for an area to be livable by humans. You still need to drive slowly next to a pavement where someone could eg trip and fall onto the road.

        • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Traffic congestion doesn’t happen because of lack of coordination. Coordination prevents collisions. Our success rate could be a lot better but the system does pretty well with coordination limited to blinking lights, a noise that says “fuck off”, the mutual knowledge that we all got the same training and the private knowledge that everyone else on the road is a suicidal idiot who slept through the training.

          Congestion is a physical property of the road network. There’s a physical limit to the number of cars you can push through a road in a given time period. Drive the cars too fast and they fly off the road when it bends, or cars slam into each other when a deer tries to commit suicide.

          Traffic is well modeled as an incompressible slightly non-newtownian fluid, like runny oobleck. If you apply more pressure/increase vehicle volume the fluid starts to bind up as it becomes harder for the cars to maneuver without collision, regardless of coordination.

          You reduce traffic by taking cars off the road, or scheduling utilization. Self driving cars won’t help, and we can do both of those without them. Long term they’re likely to make collisions worse because humans don’t know what they’re going to do, so the primary mode we have of coordination, “the theory of mind” will break down. Right now they’re so uncommon that you assume any car is a human who reacts and prioritizes like you.

          Tear down the freeways and replace them with trains.

          • Jason2357@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            In other words - car usage expands to the limit because human nature is to use the resource until it gets inconvenient. The gas expands to fill the container.

            • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 day ago

              I won’t disagree with what you said, but I’ll disagree that it’s the same point I was making.

              My point was that there isn’t a technical solution to traffic congestion. You need less fluid or a bigger pipe. What you correctly mention is why a bigger pipe won’t work for humans when it does for water.

              And out of pure pedantry, I’d disagree purely because my analogy said “non-newtownian liquid” - those don’t expand. :P it’s more like a hyperactive toddler manically jamming silly putty into a PVC pipe.

        • EddoWagt@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Traffic congestion will always be a thing. The real world is too unpredictable. You can’t pack a highway full of cars and expect them to drive highway speeds. One animal jumping on the road and you’ll have a massive accident because nobody can avoid anyone

      • Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Definitely a possibility but i would push against the likelihood of it – it could also solve a lot of our traffic issues because humans get emotional and cause traffic jams by doing easily avoidable things like clogging up the left lane with a train of tailgating cars, etc.

    • krisevol@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Have you seen sites like Reddit? Last i saw 90% of posts are bots, and 95% of comments are bots.

  • NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Well yeah. Of course it would, given the examples they are talking about.

    It makes sense right? You have a computer, you can program it to do things. I have programmed mine to scrape data or examine websites, and even in some cases to pull entire directories down.

    Now we have an agent do that. In other words a programmed computer tool that is acting on someones behalf using natural language as the question. Note the example given is an AI is looking across as many websites as it can for a review. Or maybe instructions to put something together. Or maybe a list of the highest peaks in the world with the least snowfall. Who knows, but that is endless.

    So this “traffic” is still human driven. Its just using a computer to do the work. I think that changes the perspective a little bit. It is all human intention driven.

    Also, all traffic by http plus every other request is still human, so that is a bit misleading.

    Interestingly, its not like we havent been here before if you look at traffic. The syncing of usenet for a period of time was the largest user of all traffic. So all computer connections, much, much less humans.

    Most traffic today is video, then gaming, than music, financial, screen sharing, p2p, and AI makes up a tiny portion. It just is making a huge number of requests for HTTP, but it is growing, and fast.

    This is neither pro AI, nor anti AI. I am just trying to examine the landscape instead of the over simplistic headline that really is about Cloudflares business model.

    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      You could say anything is human driven if you follow the thread far enough. I’d say if an automated process is cranking out hundreds of requests per minute then even though someone turned it on it still falls under a bot process. There is no human actually monitoring each request or interacting with it.

    • Jiral@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s not the point. Let’s put aside that an LLM driven agent is not deterministic ie, not always doing what the user intended, just like regular text autocomplete messes up as well regularly. The point is that like with e-mails when spam became so easy to generate that it flooded the system, now more sophisticated actions on the internet get easier to do (that said, most of it was possible already before, just required more skill), at least as long as LLMs are not charged at real costs but highly subsidised.

      At some point something has to give. Either tools will be developed to somewhat reliably classify the nature of the traffic or things will start to be priced out as everyone will have to pay the bill for this new kind of spam (ie low value high volume traffic, or ill intended traffic)

      • NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        A lot of that was scraping. A huge amount. Just take everything possible. Hopefully that will slow down, or as I did, I allow requests and reponses, but scraping gets kicked.

        But it is getting hard and harder to self host. Large websites and hosts (gitlab, self labs) get slammed and even DOS. Its been rough.

        There are huge network upgrades in the works to try and deal with this 3.2T are being looked at already. But of course electricity is going to hit a hard ceiling both for the data center and the network center. Hence the costs you are talking about.

        I am more concerned with the fact that if everyone is asking AI, who is going to put the answers somewhere to get them? Who is going to self host and publish like I do today? It already is rare to see people running their own websites anymore. Lemmy is pretty amazing for that, but it too has gotta be having a huge amount of traffic at each instance.

        I guess I am saying I am aware of your concerns and I have mine too.

  • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why don’t we just generate every video imaginable procedurally and host them in space? Get it over with. Every combination of anything. Because that’s what this torrent of AI slop videos feel like.