221
AI staff 'genuinely frightened' for humanity's future, ex-Anthropic researcher tells BBC (www.bbc.com)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
213 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I'm not an AI techie and I'm not well educated on LLMs/AI in general. The issue I'm having is the dichotomy between how people talk about it. I've heard completely opposite ends of the spectrum. From AI is quickly becoming advanced enough to threaten human society, all the way to its a glorified dictionary/search engine that can't really do much of anything. I know Lemmy has a steep anti-AI slant. But, can someone talk about this in a way I can wrap my head around why the divide seems so big?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

of course there's motivation for everything, which one are you assigning this individual and based on what technological disagreement?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    when the boss who is being whistleblowed against admits the whistleblower is right, you can believe both that there are problems. I can't think of any other case in history where this happened. The disgruntled ex-employee smear is a common defensive move instead.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Thats sound logic, i can't disagree with that. I still think having a machine that can automate scripting of malware is pretty dangerous to the digital society we set up. If the grid fails and the financial system collapses, I'm gonna be okay... Are you?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent