Definitely not the only one. I think the only way I would be halfway comfortable with the early levels of intrusion that are described is if I were able to ensure the software is offline and entirely in my control, without reporting back to whoever created it, and even then, probably not.
Part of me envys the tech-optimists for their outlook, but it feels like sheer folly.
I am pretty worried about the bad versions of everything listed here, and think the bad versions are what we get by default. But, also, I think figuring out how to get the good versions is just… kinda a necessary step along the path towards good futures.
I think there are going to be early adopters who a) take on more risk from getting fucked , but b) validate the general product/model. There will also be versions that are more “privacy first” with worse UI (same as there are privacy-minded FB clones nobody uses).
Some people will choose to stay grounded… and maybe (in good futures) get to have happy lives, but, in some sense they’ll be left behind.
In a good future, they get left behind by people who use some sort of… robustly philophically and practically safe version of these sorts of tools. In bad worlds, they get left behind by hollowed out nonconscious shells of people (or, more likely, just paperclipped)
I’m currently working on a privacy-minded set of tools for recording my thoughts (keystrokes, audio transcripts, keystrokes), that I use for LLM augmented thought. (Alongside metacognition training that, among other things, is aimed at preserving my mind as I start relying on those tools more and more).
I have some vague hope that if we make it to a good enough intermediate future that it seems worth prioritizing, I can also prioritize getting the UI right so the privacy-minded versions don’t suck compared to the Giant Corporate Versions.
Definitely not the only one. I think the only way I would be halfway comfortable with the early levels of intrusion that are described is if I were able to ensure the software is offline and entirely in my control, without reporting back to whoever created it, and even then, probably not.
Part of me envys the tech-optimists for their outlook, but it feels like sheer folly.
I am pretty worried about the bad versions of everything listed here, and think the bad versions are what we get by default. But, also, I think figuring out how to get the good versions is just… kinda a necessary step along the path towards good futures.
I think there are going to be early adopters who a) take on more risk from getting fucked , but b) validate the general product/model. There will also be versions that are more “privacy first” with worse UI (same as there are privacy-minded FB clones nobody uses).
Some people will choose to stay grounded… and maybe (in good futures) get to have happy lives, but, in some sense they’ll be left behind.
In a good future, they get left behind by people who use some sort of… robustly philophically and practically safe version of these sorts of tools. In bad worlds, they get left behind by hollowed out nonconscious shells of people (or, more likely, just paperclipped)
I’m currently working on a privacy-minded set of tools for recording my thoughts (keystrokes, audio transcripts, keystrokes), that I use for LLM augmented thought. (Alongside metacognition training that, among other things, is aimed at preserving my mind as I start relying on those tools more and more).
I have some vague hope that if we make it to a good enough intermediate future that it seems worth prioritizing, I can also prioritize getting the UI right so the privacy-minded versions don’t suck compared to the Giant Corporate Versions.