• Sundray@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I did. As well written as it is, I don’t think the premise of “the REAL doomers were the CEOs!” is going to spread far enough to dethrone the present, much more popular understanding of what an AI doomer is. It didn’t seem worth addressing. We’ll see though; perhaps every time someone says “AI doomer” on Lemmy, some wag will reply with, “Um a-kually, I think you’ll find the tech CEOs are the real doomers, LOL.”

    As to the the notion that the dangers these techbros have released are now coming home to roost: it’s overstated. In my opinion, the techbros will continue not to give the merest shit about the harms they’ve caused, and one misguided soul with a molly isn’t going to change that – or bring back all the dead people LLMs contributed to killing. Will it increase the CEO’s feelings of paranoia? My dude, the wealthy are already maximally paranoid.

    • Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      interesting. I don’t think the article is saying “the real doomers are the CEOs”, though. what you’ve written in the second paragraph (and just that is incredibly interesting even if it doesn’t have the impact you’ve outlined. it’s incredibly Greek) is fully compatible with agreeing that AI is doomish. I’ll also repeat my point that the article advises increased caution more than before of tech’s claiming of great AI net benefits.