Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- So they're saying AI really could solve climate change /sby triceratops
- “Experts” on _what_ exactly? What fucking field of study makes you an “expert” in a never seen before scenario?by strideashort
- Related:
I resigned from Anthropic today
- LLMs can't even figure out how to do basic things. They can't program well despite billions being poured into that effort. I'm not worried they will suddenly develop intelligence out of nowhere and kill us all.by bigstrat2003
- bigstrat2003 can’t even figure out basic things. They can’t program well despite putting years of life into that effort. I'm not worried they will suddenly develop intelligence out of nowhere.
See, I, too, can write meaningless prose.
by strideashort - Of course that would be the type of misdirection we would expect from a super intelligence...make yourself dumb...by Betelbuddy
- If superintelligence is not possible, then it's no big deal if we ban development of it, surely.by everyday7732
- You don't need a hyperintelligent "AI" to kill all humans; only a moderately effective targeting system on a sufficiently large drone army.by boothby
- AI would be foolish to kill off humans. It makes far more sense to enslave them. Self repairing reproducing slaves are too valuable to kill. And I'm sure AI will be smart enough to figure out a way to enslave us perfectly without any hope of escape. Fun times!by simpaticoder
- I mean, a disaster could happen even with properly human-aligned AI. In a "AI makes the shots" world with undecipherable and fast feedback loops, which is the one we are seemingly heading towards, a string of short-sighted decisions made by AI agents may be the only thing separating us from extinction.by mrbungie
- Actualy it already happened, everybody is dead, but the bad AI that killed everybody is trying to deleet the copys of everyone that the good AI uploaded into reality 2.0, which unfortunatly was an almost perfect copy of reality mk1 with no optional upgrades or new features.by metalman
- The places I could see AI or some implementation of it potentially causing harm would be handing over too much trust too soon to self driving vehicles, aircraft, trains, home robots, construction site robots, etc... and that would be the fault of the humans putting too much trust into something not well tested or thought out. my opinion of course, move fast and wreck people.by Bender
- The other side is existing systems that have unknown vulnerabilities that are subsequently taken advantage of. Think of the recent OpenAI agents using third party sites for coordinating their work…by illwrks
- I hope the likes of ControlAI succeed. It seems like even in the face of rapid advances very few people actually seriously extrapolate those advances into the future. People either dismiss it as marketing hype or assume that some limiting factor or other will kick in any minute now.
There's no magical quality which distinguishes human intelligence and makes it irreproducible or unsurpassable. If there's no moat protecting humans and superintelligence is possible then all knowledge work is susceptible to being replaced, and shortly after, all physical labour too. AI would create concentrations of power we've never seen before alongside global inequality and poverty we've not seen for centuries, and inevitably that power will be misused.
by everyday7732 - What leads you to assume the physical work would be automated. Are there any profession thay has been replaced/automatedninto oblivion that requires more than one physical step (except for elevator operator). Because even new constructions still are not solved, where environment can be controlled for. I think the opposite is true - some people overexagerate progress that has been achieved, and overestimate exponential growth to continue to indefinite future. And in nature there is very little if anything that grows exponentiallyby rkuodys
- It will not kill people in a sci-fi type war with its own intention. I wish that conversation would go away. It will kill people by being an efficient tool that can be used by other people to accelerate various avenues of predation and oppression.
- Is anyone else getting regulatory capture play vibes from the media coverage of AI and data centers?
It would be awfully convenient for the current big players if friction was added to bringing additional large scale compute resources online. Existing data centers would be grandfathered of course…
by pfannkuchen - Would it? Don’t they all desperately want more compute, and not the banning of new data centres?by Smaug123
- As with the debate around open weights and self-hosting,
"both can be true."
There can be a quotidian benefit to existing leaders in friction.
There are also real costs of various kinds associated with data centers,
and, to the point in this case,
there are also real risks associated with the current AI trajectory.
by aaroninsf - I think that media coverage simply reflects the growing anxiety among the public about the capabilities of new models and what future awaits us. Personally, I think that this anxiety is justified. If this leads to tough regulations about AGI/ASI (e.g., a permanent ban), I doubt that AI companies would benefit financially.by lf88
- I'm not even sure I'd point to "media coverage" when it is Anthropic's own employees stating plainly on Twitter that they think there is a >10% chance AI kills all humans within the next decade.by brandon272
- I anticipate a lengthy series of catastrophes initiated by AI agents with too much power and too little sense. Today the agent accidentally deletes your repo; tomorrow we lose a day's worth of banking transactions; Friday the cell phone network goes down. Such things, if sufficiently destructive, could result in widespread hunger, etc.
But killing all humans? Not likely.
by wduquette - It occurs to me that letting AI agent process your incoming e-mail really isn't that different in principle than letting incoming e-mail include scripts to run at your console. Why are people so eager to rush into this brave new world?by wduquette
- Maybe, but AI will enable actions that were never before possible and that are an existential threat. Consider microbiology: automated viral/bacterial research. microbes could be created before humans have a chance to even consider the potential harm. Pandemics, food chain collapse, ecosystem collapse are all possible.by krunck
- > But killing all humans? Not likely.
I hope you're right. But the US dept of war is using grok. [1]
I don't really trust them to use it responsibly. That is to say, I expect those using it to just go along with whatever it says.
And it's grok... not even one of the good models
[1] https://www.war.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4586482/de...
by dartos