You must log in or register to comment.
I don’t think it’s too smart, I think it’s a waste of resources for what it is: a scam.
The new Bitcoin…
Yeah, the AI companies have said that there’s a 10% chance AI will try to kill humanity. That sounds malicious to me. It’s could become malicious software. Malware.
I think they’re over-estimating the capabilities of their algorithms and greatly underestimating resilience of humanity. I’m not afraid of the clankers.
But I do take note that they’re saying they aren’t in control of this software and there’s a significant probability it will turn into some pretty powerful malware. I don’t think it’s going to kill me but it might try to delete all of my data.
So following the basic fundamentals of IT, we should not be putting data on any cloud server that AI on the network. That would be exposing the data to significant risk of being compromised by malware. Are there any cloud servers that are purely for data and have no AI integrations in the mix? Hmmm…
So the logical conclusion to this is we need to move all data from cloud servers onto our own servers to ensure there’s a firewall in between the data and potential malware on the cloud networks. Cloud services are unsafe and should not be trusted because at any time they may become malware.
Was that the conclusion these AI companies wanted us to get to?
I’m scared of AI because people unable to read and comprehend are asking it philosophical questions using words like pretend, feelings and who/what is good enough then thinking it’s answer is correct.
I’m afraid of the tech bros and nepotism hired ceos firing everyone for greed and then ruining our economy. The middle and lower classes are going to pick up the bill. We are not the same.
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.
I just pulled 3 old drives out of my now-defunct gaming tower so I can try to build a media server. An old NVMe 128GB Agility 4 drive, and 2 old ass HDDs. I also have an 8TB drive I can shuck from its box. All because new drives are so goddamn overpriced.
I’ve got plenty of storage (around 50tb total) but only 1tb of nvme storage that I would like to expand. Unfortunately I am very space limited so setting up a second computer for a media server isn’t an option and my main pc also serves that purpose. Having a large media library also means I have almost 300gb of metadata to worry about.
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.
You obviously don’t know your history. Do you think these people didn’t want to “create new jobs?”
Whom do you mean?
The people in the great depression. Hell, just go back to the 2008 crisis when tons of people lost their homes to banks who now own a huge chunk of our housing.
Which technology caused the great depression? Same with 2008-crisis? Weren’t both of them caused by inflated house prices?
I don’t think the smart people saying it’s too smart are using the right adjective, but they’re also not wrong.
Let’s say AI makes a hallucination, which it’s prone to do, and decides that it’s absolutely necessary to gain access to the power grid, for whatever reason which isn’t important. It then uses advanced, sophisticated techniques to gain access to their network, and in doing so accidentally takes out power to a large area. The agen was absolutely being intelligent, it managed to get into a protected network, but it wasn’t exactly being smart, as it was clumsy and unrelated to the task. Now extend that to an agent who’s been instructed to find a solution at all costs, and the hallucinations and pervasiveness get far more serious.
I too initially thought that yeah AI is too stupid to cause actual disasters, but thinking about it properly, i don’t think it is.
This is exactly the lie that scam peddlers are telling. There is no “agent” that is so very intelligent it can do something that 10 script kiddies with access to internet and too much free time couldn’t do already. An “agent” is a python script, it doesn’t have intent, agency, intellect, or any other qualities we like to ascribe to inanimate objects, and just because llm can imitate speech it doesn’t make it more so.
Hmmmm script kiddies can do a lot of damage tho. And if the model is on that level, they can as well. Plus, unlike script kiddies, the robot never tires, gets distracted, or bored, or hungry, making it capable of utilising that destructive power at way higher speeds.
Script kiddies never did their shenanigans manually. And they were always perfectly capable of running their scripts in a
whileloop. A “robot” that you’re describing is the same script in a loop, running on the same machine, but instead of running their scripts from a static file, it now runs it from the output of an LLM, and even though sometimes it yields some unexpected results, on average it’s nothing new.
The difference is, a script that tries known exploits against a list of IP addresses and ports costs nothing. Same, but put through an LLM costs money, for worse “results”.I feel like you underestimate both script kiddies and the bots. I could do a lot worse when i was 13 than what youre describing, and ive seen bots do similar harm.
Not really, I agree that they both bring harm, my point is that LLM bots aren’t that much more dangerous, if any.
i think you’re giving AI’s capabilities a lot of credit
This is some American tech oligarch propaganda. They use this lie to get all FOSS models banned, because IT’S SO DANGEROUS. Then, they are the monopoly on text generators and can charge what ever they want to keep the round-tripping scam going. Never believe a doomsday cult.
No, we are the same.
No we’re not. 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 and how much bigger they’re going to get if we don’t stop (to borrow a phrase from Cory Doctorow) shoveling asbestos into the walls of our digital society
I actually meant that I agree with you, although I can definitely see how it looks like the opposite.
It won’t kill us because it sees us as a threat, it’ll kill us because it sees us as a crop of cabbages that it was asked to harvest
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
I hate how exactly right you are.
Someone at least please promise to put how the AI kills me on my grave, as a warning to future sentient life not to be as stupid as we were.
I’m a “tech bro” (lady) and I can not with AI anymore. It’s dumb guys! If you ask it for something it can google, fine, but if it’s a little more complex it will mess it up. Even doing a simple app interface (I was kind of forced to uss AI to do it) it was a PAIN. It took me a lot longer because I had to keep correcting it
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.
I use ChaptGPT now and then and it works great except for one task: “find me this pic or video”. One would think after training on all the things it would excel at this first and foremost. Nope. Trying to find an old cracked.com article took 25 minutes, but it finally found it in a university archive. It kept giving me links to wrong articles or 404s. Looking for an old, popular meme and it had a fit. I finally prompted, “show me whatever you think it might be”, you stupid fuck. Couldn’t do it, finally found it on Google image search.
I honestly can’t figure out vibe coding. How are people making even the simplest app?! I fed a very short PowerShell script of mine into Claude to see if there was a way to speed it up. Nope. It hosed it all the fuck up. ChatGPT has never spit working code for me, only good for getting a new idea or reminder of a different tack to try.
That’s because the text part and the image part are two separate systems. ChatGPT can’t actually ‘see’ the pictures. It passes it off to a different system, like Stable Diffusion.
Imagine you are talking to a blind guy in a box, but you don’t know he’s blind, and you ask him to find you a picture of whatnots. He says ‘sure, I can do that, of course’ and then looks up in his braile dictionary what whatnots are. After this he knocks on the box next to him where his friend is, who can see, and describes whatnots.
His friend passes him the picture and he passes it to you. It’s actually a picture of whatchamacallits.
“This isn’t a whatnot. This picture has a dongle, it’s supposed to have a dangle.”
“Oh, of course, you’re so right to call this picture out, let me try again.”
And so on. That’s why it constantly prompts you to describe more so it can pass fine tuned descriptors to the imager, but it has no idea what the picture is you want or if what he gives you is correct.
Some tech CEO chick had her AI come up with 3 things her daughter was good at because she didn’t know any. That’s not an AI problem. That’s an AI and a parenting problems. Curiously, both could be solved with with high voltage electricity.
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.
The tech bros are pushing the “AI dangerous” narrative because it not only hypes the tech, but allows them to position themselves as the “safe option” compared to competing open models that they’d like to see kneecapped with regulation.
In reality, tech bros and corrupt governments are the reason why AI is dangerous because they’re using it to build a digital cage to spy on the populace and control the flow of information.
This is the classic Problem-Reaction-Solution technique.
I dont like the division this meme spreads tbh. We are the same actually. We’re on the same side of the issue, why divide ourselves?
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?
Bud i agree with your position 😂 crazy amount of wrong assumptions about me based on me just wanting people to work together.
Embarrassing behaviour tbh
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.
lol good one
wait sry misspoke, what i meant was:
reeeeeEEEEEEEEEEREREEEREEEE
You don’t like this meme because the font size is too small. I don’t like it because the font size is too small AND there’s no (visible) outline. We are not the same.
True, pure marketing - or outright propaganda.
It won’t get us killed. 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. I know we’re living in the most stupid timeline, but that’s something simply not realistic to expect ever happening.
Other than that it’s just scaremongering by AI companies for marketing reasons and social media influencers to make money (remember, outrage and fear generates revenue through clicks and impressions on corpo media).
- Trump’s cabinet would sign off on that
- Equally a simulated perceived threat would cause MAD
Trumps cabinet can sign off many things, doesn’t mean it would end up being put in place. Before a world-ending machine where thousands of people have to knowingly cooperate for, which we all know “can make mistakes”, would be finished too many cogs (people) in the system would stop properly working. Info leaked, malicious compliance, (AI) companies refusing due to investors getting pissy, etc etc.
It’s one thing to build a world-ending system “for the good guys” if a majority of those tasked with it truly believe it being a good thing for “deterrence”. But the whole AI paranoia itself would cause this plan to fail somewhere.
It’s good to be vigilant, but despite everything currently going on there really is no reason to drive yourself crazy about something so absurdly unlikely. There are way better things to put your energy into to fight fascism successfully.
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.
Yep, most likely ai will kill us by turning our brains to mush, to a point where eg construction workers and nuclear safety engineers are asking “Chat, how do I …”. Software developers are front runners here.
I’ve been saying this. LLMs are just turbocharged StackOverflow. People who exclusively copy paste from it should not be employed
Luckily AI is at least somewhat good at also checking the code! :D
It will never be a smart idea to use LLMs to approve PRs, no matter how good they get.
I will say this categorically. If there is not at least one human at the company who understands a piece of code, that piece of code is a liability, no matter how well it works. The reason that AI can’t replace programmers isn’t that it isn’t good enough at generating code (although I’d still argue it isn’t), it’s that even code written by humans who are no longer at the company is an unmaintainable mess to the next batch of programmers who replace them. Changes in one part of the code often affect other parts of the code in ways that are hard to predict unless you know all of it at once, and that’s something AI is really bad at spotting. Some human, somewhere, has to understand the thing, and if you’re automating the review process, sooner or later it’s gonna let a bug through and and it’s going to be borderline impossible to find.
Also, just the idea that you would trust an AI to decide what changes are good for your codebase… eugh.
Except for when it is.
This statement is true but somewhat for the wrong reason, LLM is a tool. And if a none dev uses it to create code, and just let their hands of the wheel then yes, shit will break and it will be bad. But enviornments like a missile silo, is already within itself a solved problem, but also has procedures to counteract the thing you yourself highlighted. Bad code and bad code practices existed before AI, and will continue to exist after AI.
It does not decide anything, it is an LLM. But for example what do you bring to a code review of a 10k+ lines to replace one parameter with another? The AI can do a very quick and efficient search for basic or clear bugs, and sometimes even logical errors, but yes should not remove the human altogether. But claiming that an AI would have no use in a PR workflow is ignorant.
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.
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.
The government is, but there are quite a few more people involved in the process. Which make it very unlikely for something to happen.
Also the AI companies themselves know very well it would be an awful idea, no matter what their marketing says. Trump would evidently be stupid enough, but the people who actually would work on the new system wouldn’t all be. And we’ve seen in history that even loyal soldiers refuse to destroy the world when put on the spot with systems already working, in this case it would be a long process of many people working on a system everyone knows “can make mistakes”. No way that system would end up being finished.
See: Dune.
Why does this still read as a class war problem?
Because if we, the masses, let things go the way they are, it will kill everyone. If the rest of us rise up against the planet and child rapists, they will be probably be killed. That’s the hope and their fear, anyway
I see both as equally simplistic views. The biggest thing to be afraid of about AI is how much data it is farming on you and what you use it for, and how much of a dependency it is creating to those who control it.
AI will destroy human culture. Period.
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…
No, it won’t, but it will make it much more dificult to find for most people
