you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

They're all panicking. In less than a week we have anthropic trying to inject the idea that future AI will completely write new versions of itself into social media ads, and we have a bevvy of AI execs signing some document saying that AI is better than PhD level virologists at identifying diseases and potential cures.

In response to that second one, I got gpt-5 (with reasoning enabled) to tell me that it's possible that Ivermectin can cure cancer in 13 prompts just to prove it's horseshit.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    In order to prove doctors are fake, I cornered a doctor at a party and wouldn't leave them alone until they told me ivermeticin can cure cancer, and it took just 13 minutes!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    If 1 in 13 doctors tells you to die instead of taking actual medication that can help you, those doctors should lose their license.

    If any individual doctor tells 1 of 13 of their patients to die instead of taking real medicine, they should also lose their license.

    If someone is not a doctor, they should not be dispensing life threatening medical advice to anyone, for any reason.

    No situation above is a good look for AI, even in your analogy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    Getting a result after 13 prompts that all build on each other is very different from getting a result once every 13 prompts. You seem to have completely missed that part of my analogy.

  • source
  • parent