People Twitter

That definitively is a negative side effect.

Though imagine you have a chat bot that is very convincing, it doesn't always say the truth but you can control what it will say.

What do you think is best use case for this, and does it have something to do with Western countries changing public opinion toward authoritarianism?

This is a very powerful tool to manipulate public opinion, imagine having a tool and a social network that can manipulate public opinion to get politicians that you back to win, to get laws passed. How valuable such tool is.

Have you wondered why they wanted to put 10 year moratorium on states being able to regulate it?

Don’t forget the other goal of surveillance capitalism plus enforcing the actions of the state. They know at some point this is all going to boil over. They’re building the walls to the prison all around us as we speak. Americans are not paying attention. AI + facial Recognition + citizen databases like what flock or Palantir are creating.

Sorry to say but that's kind of a shit conspiracy theory. I'd say it's more likely that billionaires just want to replace the entire working population with robots and AI. They don't need to sell anything to anyone, if their needs are provided by their electric slaves.

This did not start with llm models. They are removing ownership, de facto ownership, from most of our electronics now. It can all be remotely bricked at their whim. Or terms changed, licenses that you agreed to on purchase without knowing and with no way of saying no to while still getting the product, that allow them to deny you access to what you bought.

That applies to the government, able to brick your shit with no court anything, secretly in a way you will never be able to challenge in court.

Yeah kinda. But I'd say it's about removing people's ability to make purchasing decisions in general more than about piracy specifically.

When you can decide whether or not you want to purchase the newest version of MS Office, you might decide that your current version works fine, there's no new features in the new version you need. So that means companies selling software licenses need to always be putting resources into improving the software to entice people to pay for newer versions.

If the software is all being run from a data center, you have to pay a subscription to be able to use the software and access your data. They no longer need to make any improvements to the software since they have reliable revenue from just maintaining the computers the software runs on.

It's techno-feudalism. In feudalism, the lord owns the land and the peasants work the land, try to make a living and then need to pay taxes to the lord. It's a similar dynamic with data centers. The tech lords own the computers, and they allow the peasants to do work on those computers. Businesses try to make some money on the computers owned by the tech lords, but everyone is required to pay a tax to the lord that owns the computers.

The real point is building out the cloud capacity so they no longer have to sell personal computers to anyone anymore.

This is indeed probably the goal. What frightens me is the fact that a large majority of the population would go right along with this.