eh, life expectancy for US males is 77 by that point you're practically dead (sarcasm). More generally, worrying about a mid-life crisis feels silly and probably only compounds angst.
They do have a some bias, but they make that pretty clear most of the time.
The articles don't contain too much fluff or "storytelling", but mostly get very straight to the point. Also, I really like that it's a weekly magazine, no "Breaking News!!!!" type of content.
Your comment about promoting X, however in jest, reminded me that I find JH to be...an interesting person. On one hand, who am I to question him taking money from the likes of a16z-"you do you" after all. On the other hand, Fast AI seems to have put considerable effort behind "data/AI ethics." Why bother after all?
Many of these will be written down to zero. Of course, it will still have been a cheaper education in self-aggrandizement than your typical Ivy League.
Thanks for providing context Jeremy. Fast AI has done an admirable job in communicating its commitment to an ethical pursuit of AI advancement. Do you feel such a commitment aligns with the bellicose rhetoric found in a16z's vision? Here is Marc Andreessen in a recent essay...
"There is one final, and real, AI risk that is probably the scariest at all:
AI isn’t just being developed in the relatively free societies of the West, it is also being developed by the Communist Party of the People’s Republic of China.
China has a vastly different vision for AI than we do – they view it as a mechanism for authoritarian population control, full stop. They are not even being secretive about this, they are very clear about it, and they are already pursuing their agenda. And they do not intend to limit their AI strategy to China – they intend to proliferate it all across the world, everywhere they are powering 5G networks, everywhere they are loaning Belt And Road money, everywhere they are providing friendly consumer apps like Tiktok that serve as front ends to their centralized command and control AI.
The single greatest risk of AI is that China wins global AI dominance and we – the United States and the West – do not.
I propose a simple strategy for what to do about this – in fact, the same strategy President Ronald Reagan used to win the first Cold War with the Soviet Union.
'We win, they lose.'
Rather than allowing ungrounded panics around killer AI, “harmful” AI, job-destroying AI, and inequality-generating AI to put us on our back feet, we in the United States and the West should lean into AI as hard as we possibly can.
We should seek to win the race to global AI technological superiority and ensure that China does not."
I don't think one needs to think too hard about the grave consequences a mission of "We win, they lose" may have for human survival.
