AI Wars, hour one
Added 2025-04-17 17:57:00 +0000 UTCI've been sitting on the first hour of AI Wars to share with you all. This is only the first hour of the first part of what is overall estimated to be 4 hours worth of content. Keep that in mind. This is also only in 1080p due to space constraints so some of the spotlight parts look off. The substance is what matters, though.
This first part covers the history of AI, how LLMs work, and some philosophical complications that arise in regards to their "meaningfulness" or in regards to "hype." This part is a little more abstract, but I believe this part sets up the philosophical ideas that lead to the real material consequences of some of the statements we take for granted in this "discourse."
I understand many of you have concerns with generative AI in regards to Art, Environment, Labor, Fascism, and more. However, there are powerful interests at play that keeps "anti-AI" discourse in a certain state that I find completely unacceptable. These concerns are throughly addressed in the second half with tons research to share that I think anyone who cares about the future of art, environment, and labor needs to hear. I think most people will be surprised.
Nevertheless, you cannot satisfy all of the people all of the time. Many of you will come into this video disagreeing with the thesis. But know that I spent all of my being doing everything I can to throughly research this topic as much as I possibly could, and I'm confident that the final video represents what I believe to be true. My hope is that, after the 4 full hours are released, we can think about AI and critiques of AI in a way that truly benefits the social welfare. At the end of the day, most of us here share a lot of values and a similar vision of the future, and I think that's what really matters.
PLEASE DO NOT SHARE THIS VIDEO! PATREON EXCLUSIVE ONLY!
Comments
Hi Pointy Rat, do you think you’d be able to watch the section on “art” where I explain the practical consequences of humanism on this debate, to see if that addresses this criticism better? I’d like to see whether I should add more or if the art section might provide a good illustration. Please email me at alex@itsall.gay if you’re interested
E
2025-04-26 15:03:31 +0000 UTCHi Alexander, very interesting video. As a full time AI hater, I entered this watch extremely skeptically and I have to say I haven't been moved much. For background, I have a general education in computer science and AI, experience in the performing arts, and no formal education in philosophy. I think you could spend a bit more time on why thinking of "human" as a group is flawed. I absolutely understand your reasoning that historically the label "human" has been selectively applied in order to deny certain people rights; but I don't understand why the antidote to that type of thinking wouldn't be to affirm the entire group of "human" as valuable on the grounds that they are human, no exceptions. This type of categorization feels different than categorizations based on race or sex because the whole point is no person is left out; the second you segregate one person out of the human label, you're no longer using it correctly. Again, I have no formal training in philosophy so I am sure there is a piece of this argument that I am missing, but because I am missing that piece, the rest of your video doesn't really add up for me; I believe that human writing or art is more valuable than writing or art algorithmically constructed by an LLM because of the fact that a human made it, and human life is uniquely valuable.
Pointy Rat
2025-04-25 17:24:40 +0000 UTCI am hype for the full video. I already really liked the first hour and it's really set up as a slow burn I would say, which I personally like a lot. I felt a very empathetic guidance to the conversation and even to the necessity of critically engaging with the subject matter but also liked the recurring statement that it feels very easy to want to immediately bash on AI stuff because it is being produced and furthered by such criminal/antisocial intent. I especially liked the end of the first hour where it feels like a clear dialogue with leading experts on the field and how they themselves also acknowledge how humanism in the way its used in our critique can backfire. As you allude to, this might really mean that our discourse about the topic has to grow/evolve and we cannot just fall back to old patterns. Looking forward to the rest of it and your takes! I hope you have a nice day and the last crunch goes as smooth as it can go
ValentineSmith
2025-04-19 19:04:08 +0000 UTC
