Well, that too.

And the shredded books and the datacenters and the environmental effects, let's not forget those.

That too and I just want to be able to afford a pair of 2tb nvme.

Well this happens with any big technology innovation, jobs become redundant and are therefore removed. We have to remember however that economy as a whole, and with that jobs. Are a human construction, we create jobs for ourselfs so we can be part of a collective that at least theoretically works together.

So we will just create new jobs or things for us to do. Even when we reach singularity.

The Terminmaybe

"these are not the droids you're looking for"

"You're absolutely right to call that out--its a genuine miscalculation on my part. Let me rerun that for you now."

You worded my own meme better than me

you’ll realize it’s not worth several trillion dollars and the bubble might pop.

No lay employee sending bad vibes at FartGPT will scuff the paint on the latest data center.

Now, if Larry Fink gets bearish on AI, that's a problem. God fucking help the industry if Larry Ellison stops plowing Oracle debt into Altman's voracious appetite for compute.

But nobody on Lemmy has any impact on the price of the auction price of a stick of RAM, much less the multi-trillion dollar AI market cap.

The gap between googling and making an interface that you like is a bit wider than "a little". And really it can do good stuff. I was able to develop a world class filling degree simulation based on existing ideas and how to improve them. No way could I have programmed that in any reasonable timeframe. That does not mean it is good in every way, please no straw.

Cory Doctorow calls it "criti-hype" (a term he defines as repeating a company's marketing material and adding "and that's bad" at the end), but I gotta say I like this better

It’s smart enough to fly a drone and return it to base for a recharge.

It's not.

These tools are consistently just proxies for cheap overseas manual labor. AI is consistently augmented by mirrored human actions and often just a fascade - a juiced up mechanical turk.

WAY more worried that someone who owns the AI/Drones will use it to kill us.

If Lavendar AI is any indication of how these tools will be used, they are far more often employed as propaganda - whitewashing war crimes by generating fake accusations of imminent danger and intelligence data.

You'll still be killed by a human. Maybe a manual operator. Maybe a human guided missile. Maybe just some asshole with a gun.

The AI will then fabricate the reason for your murder and feed it to the bureaucracy that helps pacify anyone who might object to your death.

that someone who owns the AI/Drones will use it to kill us.

Or that they'll just be lazy and sloppy.

In movies you used to sometimes see someone put a brick on a car's gas pedal so they could send it through a wall, or into a lake, or whatever. In a comedy, you sometimes used to see someone rig up something so that their car could drive while they slept.

Running AI "agents" is basically like opening up some application that has a lot of keyboard shortcuts to run various scripts and then putting a brick on the keyboard.

Unfortunately, we're now at a stage where some people think that's a good idea. The machines aren't capable of thought, they have no desires or goals. But, if some of those scripts instruct a drone to go out and kill someone, the brick on the keyboard can get someone killed.

I feel a little of both. Though I primarily feel fear because none of the adults I talk to can see through the facade and understand that AI is currently harmful, no matter what you are using it for.

It would require a state to plug an AI into their nuclear arsenal with full, independent target and fire permissions - there are too many humans in any state for something that absurdly stupid to happen.

The current "state" in the US is absolutely stupid enough to do something like that. The only solace I have is that most nuclear defense systems are intentionally low-tech — both for reliability and for security. I'm pretty sure the only thing stopping the current regime from plugging ChatGPT into the nuclear triad is that it's structurally impossible to plug anything into it.

1. Trump's cabinet would sign off on that
2. Equally a simulated perceived threat would cause MAD

Hegseth authorized the bombing of a school in Iran after ignoring the AI that flagged it as a civilian building and not a target. No one stopped that from happening. Israel uses an AI targeting system to murder civilians daily.

I’m not gonna put any stock in the idea that someone intelligent will always stand in the way of the moron reaching for the big red button.

See: Dune.

Or somebody could vibecode the software that runs on a missile silo and no one notices it has a bug until the warhead goes off before it gets launched.

That's just a parenting problem.

because she didn’t know any

That's not what happened. She could think of many things but was having trouble with the vastness and complexity because the assignment was "(only) 3 bullet points".

It's still a lame reason to use the resource-hungry plagiarism machines.

It'll kill us all because some jackass deployed LLM generation code into production without reading it first and the combine harvester's brake stopped working because a dialog box was open on the dashboard

Agreed. It's a bit of both. There's been people talking about the "alignment problem" in the right fora for like 20 years. And, if we ever have consciousness / sentience that is created by us, it will be something that it would be nice to have an answer to.

But, the most relevant AI issues today are not that. It's about liability-shifting and other externalization by the powerful, misunderstanding and misuse by the well-meaning, and various cognitive hazards. These are not marketing, these are what the companies don't want you to think about. There also lock-in and labor issues that the model providers don't want to talk about, though these do have somewhat-known mitigations. You get plenty of people that are primarily concerned with these issues being dismissed a "AI doomers" which in, I think, wrong.

Superhuman Intelligence might be a threat if any of the companies developing AI right now had any way that their word guessing programs could possibly simulate consciousness. The best argument I've heard so far that they could is "no one understands how LLMs work, and no one understands how the human brain works, so you can't prove they're not the same."

Talking about superhuman intelligence now, and fretting and worrying about what we're going to do in the future where AI is smart enough to be dangerous, ignores all of the ways AI is dangerous now, like giving wronf answers, making it almost impossible to find useful information on the internet because sites that have it are buried under AI-generated SEO slop that's wrong half the time, consuming way more electricity and water than municipalities can afford to supply them with, the datacenter heat island effect, carbon emissions and other forms of deadly pollution from brand new power plants for AI datacenters, to say nothing of all the jobs that are being destroyed by bosses that think their customers won't notice the change in product quality.

Precisely what I'm talking about.

Why does that scare you? Because it implies that you are not important enough that they dignify you with a personal message?

I would rather see it as them being lazy, and that yes they have no personal connection to you. You are only someone they need for their work.

No, it won't, but it will make it much more dificult to find for most people

What most people fail to realize is that most people aren't computer users.

Go outside and meet some. It'll be ok*

*Assuming you can overcome the crippling anxiety. It's hard..

You don't like this meme because it sows division, I don't like this meme because the font size is too small, we are not the same.

It's the human way.

No, we're not. I need you to understand that. One of us is concerned only with things AI might hypothetically do in the future and what we need to do to prepare for that, which consists almost exclusively of taking actions that directly benefit AI companies, and the other one is concerned with the very real harms that AI is causing right here and now to real people (people who want to buy computer components; artists, creatives, and other knowledge workers who are watching their entire career paths get erased because while AI output is much shoddier than their work, it's a lot cheaper, and their bosses don't care about quality; people who live near the datacenters and have to put up with low water pressure, power outages, infrasound, and heat islands; people who need to look things up online and need to worry about whether the first result on noai.duckduckgo.com is a 100% AI generated website that contains no useful information; people who live on the same planet as the hundreds of coal and natural gas power plants being built to power all of those GPUs as governments around the world decide that being AI-forward is more important than their climate goals) and how much bigger all of those problems are going to get if we don’t stop (to borrow a phrase from Cory Doctorow) shoveling asbestos into the walls of our digital society.

Talking about how AI is too powerful to be left unchained is doing the companies' marketing work for them. Did you actually read the whitepaper they published about Mythos? Did you actually read the details of what happened to HuggingFace? Do you realize how many protections that had been in place for decades had to be disabled before the mindless slop machines could accomplish anything at all?