They don’t actually care about curing cancer, they just use it to justify their existence. If they did cure cancer they’d hide it or figure out how to monetize the fuck out of it.
Well, here’s the thing, you can’t cure cancer. Cancer is just a type of a many different things, all requiring very different avenues of potential “cure”.
To cure cancer, like it’s a singular, is like the DNA equivalent of “finding the cure for mental illness”.
So whenever you hear it on the forefront of something, you know it’s bullshit narrative.
did you know those lovely chaps at google have already effectively solved the protein folding problem that is already leading to revolutions in medicine
oh you didn’t know that. what does that make you
you like revolutions don’t you? oh only bloody ones. good luck with that
Subscription based chemo…
Reminds me of a two sentence horror I read a few years back:
“I wish there was a cure for cancer!”
“Why waste your wish on something that already exists?”
i’m not sure about hiding it, as we have a cure for a type of cervical cancer. i’ve taken it.
With the type of AI they are creating? Probably the best you’ll get is a paper containing a ton of misinformation that sounds correct combined with already established facts/research.
GenAI can easily regurgitate anything in its training data, but you ask it something about the coding language you just created and it’ll bullshit you because it cannot work without you feeding it training data on said language. It’s very much so like a human in that you ask someone to answer a question about something outside of what they know and they cannot reliably give you a correct answer outside of sheer dumb luck.
Of course the good human will hopefully comes to not knowing.
GenAI has an unfortunate tendency to output consistent sounding stuff with high apparent confidence that means nothing at all. Which still can be useful in a context where the “correctness” can be objectively validated like certain software development tasks, but terrible for anything where the output cannot be automatically verified. Have to decide if it helps you research more concretely, the output doesn’t actually matter if it is wrong
“The race must be won at all costs. When I am god-emperor of the universe, then we can talk about curing cancer or whatever”
LLMs can’t and won’t cure cancer. That’s why they go into the ai race.
AI will cure cancer before human scientists.
Not because it’s smart or will figure it out on its own. It’s just a lot better at aggregating completely disparate pieces of information. A scientist researching in one field doesn’t hold the the whole body of knowledge of other fields. So it takes time to piece the bits together.
This is why discoveries are often made near simultaneously in different parts of the globe by different people. Just enough information gathered in just the right locations seen by people with the appropriate amount of knowledge.
With AI, that last bit gets faster and it will get the credit.
“Ending humabity” with “random shinny text generator”… nope… this is just hype for investors
Excuse me? Explain, if you can, how systematically destroying all life and turning the world into an uninhabitable waste hostile to even the most resilient microbe wouldn’t also eradicate cancer? Checkmate, atheists.
I hope the song 99 luftbaloons is included in their training data.
Conservatives don’t have media literacy
Mostly the ones Born in the USA.
International ones are just as dumb. See: Nigel Farage and Brexit in the UK and Afd in Germany.
I’m not entirely sure how Born in the USA applies here. Care to elaborate?
Half of Americans think it’s a pro-USA song.
I’m aware of that. How does that have anything to do with conservatives worldwide being morons? Or are you one of those idiots who think that only Americans have that problem?
Good thing neither of those things will happen
