cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/52697114

all 25 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 2 points 2 hours ago

That was my first thought when I saw a headline this morning about the treat of AI. Don't get me wrong, I do believe AI is a threat, however Trump is going to kill the world first if he isn't dealt with.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 hours ago*

    The threat of AI is unknown and unsure. Climate change is going to kill or severely harm billions, in the next 100 years, and we know this for a fact. Conservative media wants to distract from their massive failures with a new boogeyman, they just randomly rolled one that might actually be a problem in the future.

  • source
  • Ehh AI is killing us now with emissions

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 5 hours ago

    we shouldn't care about the thing that will kill us in all in the near future because there are other things that are also killing us.

    Bad take.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 12 hours ago (1 child)

    Also it's a sales tactic. "our AI is so clever, it's so scary!" wink wink

    It just means they don't invest enough in proper sandboxing and does NOT diminish the abhorrent resource usage and blatant data theft and plagiarism committed by these companies, while they poison the well of information that is the internet for everyone else.

    Meanwhile their faux experts feed us questionable information, but you should always check it yourself (right). If I ask any other expert for advice that turns out to be blatantly false, you would keep them accountable for damages.

    The danger is that we can't seem to hold them accountable for anything, not that the thing is "dangerously clever". If someone builds a bad bot (regular software or AI/MCP/harness), they should be fully responsible. Just don't run it if you can't guarantee safe operations.

    That it's hard for them to properly credit where their training data came from should be their problem and a hard prerequisite for publishing or allowing usage of models. Ripping off everything ever published online has never been OK in the first place. They are 'asking for forgiveness later' and should definitely not get it.

    The training and exploitation of these models should be subjected to pollution tax just like any other industry. Water is becoming more and more scarce around the globe and humongous electricity consumption isn't magically pollution free because it isn't fossil fuels. The precious metals in all chips and datacenters are even further from "clean".

    Don't even get me started on the societal and psychological impacts...

    These companies (and to an extent their users) will never self-regulate, we need our governments to actually step up here.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 9 hours ago

    I can imagine some government prompting an LLM to break into some other governments system to steal state secrets.

    ”Here are the files you were after. Btw, I also stumbled across the nuclear launch codes, which I’ve confirmed are working. Was I a good machine? :3”

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 11 hours ago (6 children)

    I thought the people in power were promoting AI, especially since they’re the ones investing in it so much.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 hours ago

    They know LLM have serious diminishing returns now, can't grow much anymore and certainly not get to AGI anytime soon but investors won't like the message, so if the government sees it as too dangerous and pulls the handbrake right about now that'd be so convenient. Certainly if it also keeps out or limits (Chinese) competitors.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 9 hours ago

    It's both. Saying that LLMs are AI and that they're so powerful that they might become gods is doomspeak that also inflates their valuations, because our society doesn't value things by their contribution, but by their potential for exploitation and disruption.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 10 hours ago

    Yeah they’re promoting it by saying 😱omg it’s so dangerous you need to regulate us knowing that no one will and it’ll just scare people into thinking it’s going to be all powerful, and that gives those in positions of power massive hard ons for more authoritarian control. Or something like that idk Cory Doctorow saying interesting things about it recently, nice antidote to all the scare hype atm

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 13 hours ago (1 child)

    I mean AI data centers are a huge contributor to greenhouse gas emissions too

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 11 hours ago* (2 children)

    If you think hard about it....

    in 100 years, by all experience the current wars will be so irrelevant that nobody will even bother to piss on the current warmongers graves. They will be mostly forgotten.

    In 100 years, our today's leaders inactivity on imminent climate destruction - and transitively, our collective inaction - will be daily cause for deep desperation and the darkest curses which childs of the human race have ever uttered. For what we know sufficiently, people will likely witness the disintegration of our current technical civilization. Because 3 degrees warming is way too much for a technical civilization to survive.

    Maybe because of my lack of expertise in history, but I can´t imagine find any example in history of such epic stupidity. Remember that qualitatively, we know exactly what will happen.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 hours ago*

    100 years

    First of all, everything you described is coming much sooner than that. Divide it by five and even that's conservative imo.

    people will likely witness the disintegration of our current technical civilization. Because 3 degrees warming is way too much for a technical civilization to survive.

    It seems like maybe you have a fundamental misunderstanding of why climate change is going to kill us. Being a "technical civilization" isn't relevant to whether we survive it or not. We're talking about ecological collapse, and conditions that the human body literally cannot survive in. Like physically incapable. "Technical civilization" or not.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 13 hours ago

    And don't forget, they like to rape kids too

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 14 hours ago

    Yeah,AI is just another tool for them to kill us all

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

    I don't see why the legislature shouldn't comply with their request for the industry to be regulated. What's the objection to that?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 hours ago*

    This isn't why, but it's worth noting that the calls for regulation (from the big companies) are coming now. This is them pulling the ladder up because they're scared of other Western firms taking advantage of the rapid improvement of open source and cheaper models to build competitors at a fraction of the investment. I guarantee you that at least the US will not significantly bind any of the big players, not under this administration and likely not under any.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 12 hours ago

    From Trump at least, the objection seems to be that China wouldn't regulate their industry - but then China could just argue the same in an infinite loop of nobody doing any form of regulation

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 12 hours ago

    Men Homunculi in power adore immigrants. They created desperate people in poor countries. These people will want to come to expensive countries and accept any terms the men homunculi in power can get away with, to increase their margins by lowering wages and worker rights.

  • source
  • [+] -9 points 13 hours ago

    😆😅😂🤣😭😭😭😭😭😭

  • source