We don't have a rigorous definition of consciousness, and there are so many questions. Is consciousness a thing that can exist independently on its own? Or is it a quality (like hardness or color) that can only be associated with something else? Is it an emergent property? Is it binary - are things either conscious or not? Or maybe there's no such thing as consciousness; it's just a word we came up with to describe the process of having thoughts and feelings?
My own intuition: it is an emergent, non-binary property that requires a physical substrate like a brain. If I am right, it means that animals have consciousness too (at varying degrees). If GPUs are the "brain", then AI is conscious, or will become so at some point.
> it is an emergent, non-binary property that requires a physical substrate like a brain. If I am right, it means that animals have consciousness too (at varying degrees). If GPUs are the "brain", then AI is conscious, or will become so at some point.
That's an interesting observation. Though, there are many simple animals. How do you define consciousness here? Is it automatically conscious because it is an animal? What, then, is an animal defined by you?
I don't see AI as conscious. The reason I think of it that way is the hardware. The hardware does not allow for that. Simulation is not comparable to neurons. But with another hardware, it could become conscious eventually. So your statement "will become at some point" may be true, though my definition is based on the underlying hardware and right now this one does not allow for true intelligence, so the whole AI field is a misnomer.
I've considered whether our current transformer-based AI could be conscious, as I understand it, which I deem to include some degree of self awareness combined with some degree of external awareness. I can see how theoretically something could be self aware without any external awareness, but I grasp at straws when I try to envision what that experience could be like.
In either event, I think transformer-based AI can only be conscious during the act of inference. If that's the case, then the experience of consciousness that the AI is subjected to must be the content of the tokens in the context window and the activated weights. Maybe that's reason enough to be polite to our agents?
> That's an interesting observation. Though, there are many simple animals. How do you define consciousness here? Is it automatically conscious because it is an animal? What, then, is an animal defined by you?
Imagine consciousness as a 0-1 scale. Simple unicellular organisms will be closer to 0, while apes and humans closer to 1. I'm not suggesting that assigning this value rigorously is possible or that humans are at a 1. Perhaps the total consciousness in the universe (i.e. the sum of the consciousness of all organisms therein) is constantly increasing, like entropy.
I can't empathize with this mindset at all. I'm in the polar opposite camp. I don't want a list of search articles; just a direct answer to the information I was looking for. I see the problems pointed out by OP but they are being solved away.
Makes sense to me. When I use Google, I am interested in getting the information quickly and in the right length and format, and am not interested in navigating to particular page(s) and looking up that info myself. Perhaps this will impact Adwords revenue in the long run but Google will find a way out. If Google didn't have AI mode, I would've stopped using it completely.
It's not necessarily bad, but in tech, not actively growing is tantamount to shrinking. Organic customer churn and attrition means that you're just a few years away from irrelevance. If DBX wants to stay a stable tech company, it should figure out a way to go private.
> It's not necessarily bad, but in tech, not actively growing is tantamount to shrinking.
Dont we frequently complain that the primary driver behind ensittification of products is the need for perpetual growth at any cost.
I understand the need for growth but if the market is saturated and profits are stable, then may be thats a signal that they need to innovate or branch out into other/adjacent tech without making it worse for their existing customers. But leaders take the shortcut.
Yeah but in a market where the current suppliers are satisfying demand, I feel like the churn just means your customers will go across the metaphorical street to the other guy, and you likewise have the opportunity to bring in someone from a competitor. So you still, of course, need to invest in marketing and retention, but as a means to maintain stability, not to grow forever. The cloud storage market feels pretty mature, so customers are going to be constantly shopping around for the best deal, or the best support contract, or whatever.
They had a terrific product that worked well in ~2013, but they haven't innovated since then (TBH, not sure what "innovation" means in the file-sync space.) Although Y-o-Y revenue is mostly flat, I'm a little surprised that they still brought in $630M the last quarter, and that they still have 2,000 employees. Looking at what Dropbox does, I would have guesstimated they were a 250-person company.
All the best to their employees, but I think a big round of layoffs will be coming within the next couple of quarters.
On our last couple of Japan trips, we would walk into 7/11s for an inexpensive coffee, an egg or fruit sandwich, and also do some treasure-hunting for co-branded items with Muji/Uniqlo or others. It became a short and meaningful part of our routine. We loved the convenient locations and fantastic service at all their stores. Well done, Suzuki-san!
IDK man - this is sort of true, but I think you under-estimate how quality and price scale. A Jumbo-Choco-Monaka at 7/11 is still a fantastic value at ¥160 even if you adjust for purchasing power. GDP Per Capita (PPP) is about $85K in the US and about $60K in Japan, but even granting a 2x increase for California then a $2 choco-monaka would be a steal. As it is, I just spent $4.50 for an Its-It about an hour ago and while I am quite a dedicated fan of these things I would have gladly forked over ¥700 for a Chocomonaka if such things existed in California. I realize that people don't live out of 7/11 for their daily groceries and your point has some validity, but the quality/cost is still a great deal relative to what you would get in America.
$85K vs $60K ...to give you some idea the typical wage in Okinawa for a combini job is about $6/hour. I think the income disparity is larger than those numbers suggest.
FWIW Japanese people living there tell me combinis are expensive based on their salaries and I believe them.
IIUC Japanese budgets are different. They spend comparatively less on housing and transportation than Americans. The Anglosphere in general has somehow developed a rather toxic status quo when it comes to that first basic need, with everything else only being slightly cheaper.
I would rather pay 15% more on goods and 30% less on rent.
> I would rather pay 15% more on goods and 30% less on rent.
Exactly. Housing and the housing market in Japan is an interesting beast. Based on my limited understanding as someone who has sort-of briefly looked at buying a home in Japan, houses are not really financial investments. For example, compare house prices in Japan (including the land) with a house in Australia.
Indeed, Japanese houses are designed to be disposable. Likely a result of them being built historically out of wood and paper and the abundance of wood.
Japanese "disposable houses" was a policy implemented after WW2, to rapidly rebuild the country as well as keeping a lot of people employed. And indeed a house has traditionally dropped faster in value after purchase than even cars.
And this policy has also meant that houses haven't been insulated, and very often haven't been strong against earthquakes, the latter is kind of baffling in this earthquake-prone country (the Noto earthquake on Jan. 1 2024 flattened large areas of houses, with nothing left standing). It's only gradually, through certain code changes implemented a couple of times post-1980 that things are improving. But it was as late as just a few years ago that the Japanese government hesitated, and in the end didn't implement certain new building standards, because that would put a LOT of makers out of work as they didn't have the competance to build to those standards. But this has finally changed, with the latest update a year ago.
I have to take issue with the ".. out of wood and paper". Because that's not the cause. There are buildings here literally a thousand years old and built of wood, still standing, after centuries of sometimes unbelievably big earthquakes. And wooden homes built properly these days handle earthquakes as good as anything else. It's not the material, it's how it's done which matters.
Source: Researched a lot of house building companies the last couple of years. Some of them, building wooden houses, have been in business for a long time and haven't had a single house as a victim of earthquakes for half a century, with the occasional exception where the earth has literally flipped over. Nothing can handle that. But "ordinary" earthquakes? All still standing. There are photos around showing certain houses alone on a field of flattened buildings. These guys.
It's not just that. Houses are a consumer good instead of an investment, yes, but a large percentage of Japanese people live in apartments that are built to last and be renovated (because they ARE investments).
The difference is partly the attitude towards houses, but it also has to do with how difficult it is for foreign investors to speculate in the market, the ubiquity of public transit (which makes accessibility as a value-driving feature mostly moot), the way the building code precludes a "missing middle" (or "missing cheap place"), and other features of modern Japanese society that are alien to Americans (and Canadians, but weirdly not always to Britons).
The point is that there are lots of ways to chip away at the affordability issue. It's just that ALL of them necessarily attack RE investors' ability to exploit their property to the fullest extent possible.
One last anecdote: South Korea is similarly situated to Japan, but is also facing an extreme affordability crisis. So, there is the suggestion that NONE of the material aspects matter if the owner class is determined to wring every cent out of you. The changes disincentivize gouging, but in the end, you just have to have property owners willing to acknowledge housing as a an affordable necessity and not a profit center built on the backs of a captive audience...
It's not the exchange rate. It's 30 years of economic destruction and currency devaluation as the end result of horrific spending policies. If Japan doesn't right the ship, they'll sink into middle income territory over the next 30 years. Poland and Greece are now just slightly below them in GDP per capita - and Lithuania is above them (unthinkable circa the mid 1990s).
Realistically Japan is very close to being a second tier economy. It's quite plausible that Croatia and Latvia will pass them on GDP per capita over the next decade. 7-11 Japan would be relatively inexpensive for the citizens of any affluent nation, because Japan is so much poorer than it used to be.
7/11 is still 30-50% more expensive than the supermarkets, so irrespective of how affluent people are, it's a poor choice.
I used 'exchange rate' because not only is the yen weak, but the USD seems pretty strong - I guess it depends on where in the US you are from, but as a Brit, US feels expensive to me, Japan feels cheap, ergo Americans must find Japan even cheaper than I do.
I think tourists just don't know the names of grocery stores, don't see them on social media, and don't expect them to have essentially all the same items as convenience stores (and in even greater variety) because ones back home have disappointing prepared and packaged foods. They also just don't care about wasting money when it already feels cheap.
Unrelated but another tip unknown to tourists is to get cold drinks (even alcohol) at pharmacies instead of convenience stores: their beverage fridges tend to be set much colder.
Thank you. I live in Japan and it is incredibly frustrating to hear people here talk about the exchange rate as if it is some temporary but unfortunate weather condition, rather than the downstream effect of a generation of terrible policy decisions that it actually is
Convenience stores have gotten more expensive but they've always been an expensive option in Japan. It's always been much cheaper to go to grocery stores or other such alternatives to get the same items.
Aren't in late stage techno consumerist demographic collapse that many others (Germany, China, yeesh, South Korea) aren't going to suffer from to an even worse degree?
I guess one could point to various policies, especially with pseudo- protectionist benefits given to the Japanese mega conglomerates, which like in Korea are kind of just an extension of the government.
But I wonder if such economic policy fumbling is in an evil outgrowth as people try to deal with the underlying collapse.
And now compare not the numbers, but what these countries actually produce, in global sense. Japan produces cars, electronics, medical and precision stuff, cultural exports. And what do Croatia produce? Not even speaking about almost dying Latvia and Lithuania.
Is it their spending habits and resulting expenditure on infrastructure or is it their currency policies to try to boost exports? Not challenging but asking for clarification.
> Poland and Greece are now just slightly below them in GDP per capita - and Lithuania is above them (unthinkable circa the mid 1990s)
Re Poland and Lithuania: USSR collapsed in early 90s, and many would have been forgiven for thinking that these countries would continue to live in poverty, which they obviously didn't. Notably, USSR was a donut empire where the peripheral regions were richer and more educated than the heartland. That's also why the collapse of USSR started there. Sarah Paine talks about that.
The countries you cite all exited communism ruined but with an educated workforce and a working education system, and benefited tremendously from EU access.
It is not that Japan has fallen to their level, it’s that they have experienced an economic boom in the last decades, and are not that far behind western Europe now.
In our local 7-11 I can find the exact same carton of milk as sold in the supermarket, and the price is also exactly the same. So it depends. Some of the other stuff sold there is more expensive, but somewhat surprisingly it isn't that more expensive, so if I need butter or yoghurt or tea in a hurry then it's no big sacrifice to stop at the closer 7-11 instead of adding the extra five minutes (of walking) to go to the supermarket instead.
And how had the Japanese inflation / cost of living changed over the last 10 years or so? I went there in 2015 and now hearing this I'm strongly thinking about paying another trip there...
I mean, back then 1 EUR bought 135 yen and now it's 185, and I already remember restaurants to be pretty cheap for the average quality, while hotels/apartments sucked a bit - especially in room size.
On my trip there with a group of friends we would wake up and head to the local 7-11/Lawson/Family Mart. Even when we went into the countryside for the hot spring baths in Hokkaido there was a Lawson in town. 7-11 had the best food though. I loved those chicken teriyaki egg sandwiches, onigiri and the yakisoba-pan. But those chocolate swirl babkas were clutch. I once wandered in late night and cleared the shelf of them.
I'm tired of people who, when they don't like an article, comment that it was "obviously written by AI" instead of arguing its merits.
As for your points, global wealth is not a fixed pie, so it's not "impossible to have more than 470 trillionaires". Re:"1 person billion dollar company or 5-10 employee in the Fortune 500 is laughable" - it is difficult but not impossible. Currently, the company ranked at the bottom of the Fortune 500 (No. 500) is Vulcan Materials, with a revenue of ~$8 billion. I can imagine a company combining domain expertise with amazing AI/engineers to achieve superlative product-market fit and hit this revenue number.
> I'm tired of people who, when they don't like an article, comment that it was "obviously written by AI" instead of arguing its merits.
The point is that this article is extremely badly written; an over-influated piece of text that could easily be ¼ as long. We assume that it is written by AI merely because AI tends to produce not-worth-reading texts like this.
That particular company employees 12,000 people, and it's very, very hard to imagine them being replaced wholesale by AI, although maybe someone will figure out self-driving loaders, self-driving trains, self-operating scales, and so forth.
The same is true in India. I live in the US, and when I visit relatives in India, they are nonplussed that I can afford a fancier car but choose to drive a Toyota. Clothes, watches, my phone brand - everything is under constant analysis and people feel free to comment on everything. I am used to it now but it gets tiring.
A poorly thought, as a result, a poorly-written article. Almost everyone wants to automate away the boring parts of their work and life. The author created a strawman, but that is not what AI is ("Not everything about our lives can be measured and automated and optimized, and it shouldn’t be.")
I've been listening to the Verge podcast and I've listened to Nillay refine this article piece by piece for weeks. He had the headline in mind for a long time and I've heard most of the points addressed in this article. It's now interesting to see all that distilled into this single article.
It's definitely not poorly thought out article. People want to automate away the boring parts of their work and life but, as the meme says, people want AI to do their dishes and laundry so they can do writing and art but instead AI does their writing and art so they can do the laundry.
I'm not sure what you think the straw man is here. I think he already addresses this in the article: "I’m not saying regular people don’t use Excel or Airtable to plan their weddings or have fun throwing PowerPoint parties, or even that AI won’t be useful to regular people over time [...] Not everything about our lives can be measured and automated and optimized, and shouldn’t be."
Nilay has been discussing these ideas on podcasts hosted by The Verge over the last few weeks. I can tell it's something that's been top of mind for him especially on his podcast series Decoder where he interviews CEOs about their approach to integrating AI in their products and how consumers feel about this.
Working in IT and AI related fields I made the opposite observation. Taking as HR an example, professionals there wanted to keep the boring reporting tasks and automate the human part, e.g. career guidance, mediation etc.. At the time I could not understand the reason why. In hindsight it was a reward driven decision. Human to human interaction is rarely instantly rewarded. Producing reports on the other hand is measurable and mostly rewarded right away.
This is compounded by many managers not understanding the details of what their direct reports actually do. I've had so many supervisors in my career who just have no concept of what I really do in IT, though it's pretty obvious to me and my coworkers. So when it comes to review time, I'm always having to walk them through what I actually do.
Contrast this to when I am tasked with creating a report that they need. They're amazed. Absolutely amazed that I can write something coherent. I can only assume that with the Peter Principle, they're all surrounded by idiots who write emails and reports like Epstein.
> A poorly thought, as a result, a poorly-written article. Almost everyone wants to automate away the boring parts of their work and life.
mm, the fact that you disagree with the article doesn't make it poorly written.
In my experience no, there are significant limits to how much automation the average person wants in their life. Even if automating something would save time, doing so could be undesirable due to other metrics such as correctness, cost, latency, flexibility, or cognitive load.
> The author created a strawman, but that is not what AI is ("Not everything about our lives can be measured and automated and optimized, and it shouldn’t be.")
In context, what you've quoted there is not the creation of a strawman. In fact you yourself seem to have constructed a strawman out of the article.
If every single image on their blog was generated by Images 2.0 (I've no reason to believe that's not the case), then wow, I'm seriously impressed. The fidelity to text, the photorealism, the ability to show the same character in a variety of situations (e.g. the manga art) -- it's all great!
My own intuition: it is an emergent, non-binary property that requires a physical substrate like a brain. If I am right, it means that animals have consciousness too (at varying degrees). If GPUs are the "brain", then AI is conscious, or will become so at some point.
reply