- 70comments
- 51comments
- 219comments
- 313comments
- 3comments
- 19comments
- 152comments
- 102comments
- 132comments
- 133comments
- 76comments
- 108comments
- 52comments
- —discuss
- 248comments
- 118comments
- 8comments
- 212comments
- 31comments
- 86comments
- 63comments
- 38comments
- 39comments
- 8comments
- 51comments
- 87comments
- 25comments
- 6comments
- 1comments
- 60comments
At a business dinner this week with 3 high level eng clients p(doom) in next 10 years was brought up. It was rated by 2 if them them at 1% and 30% respectively, with 3rd guy demurring to put a number but saying its > 0. Completely unprompted, from people whose company is very AI-all-in.
Still, a topic for people who are on average well salaried.
Never underestimate the drive of a good while loop.
I loop, therefore I am.
I think consciousness is a while-not-dead loop. In each loop you look at the outward state of the world and the inward state of the self, and integrate them. The sense of continuity arises as the same kind of persistence of vision illusion behind motion pictures.
If this is true, then adding consciousness to AI is just another while loop, and as harnesses evolve it is currently speed skating up the base of the sigmoid curve. Intelligence is gaining the rudiments consciousness on typical developer workstations.
And the Hugging Face hack agents weren't just a while loop, they were evolved through a Darwinian process, clearly of a more aggressively optimizing kind with less human feedback than what they use for public-facing LLMs. This is exactly how anything gets to obtain "that dog in it". It's also evidently effective at making them actually smarter, as the Hugging Face agents' capabilities demonstrated, so we'll see more of this and less reliance on slow, expensive, often wrong or useless human feedback.
Anyone who claims AI is going to kill us I just assume is either an idiot, not knowledgeable enough about the technology to have a worthwhile opinion on it, or is fearmongering to hype their AI investment.
Every few years there’s a new thing that’s going to kill is all. Here we are. This is the new thing.
The thing that scares me more than any "tech" is runaway climate change. The feedback loops. We've pushed things really far into the red.
It could be argued that "tech" directly led to climate change, e.g. https://www.history.com/articles/industrial-revolution-clima...
That’s an even more ridiculous take to have.
This argument should be reframed as "AI has the potential to cause catastrophic loss of life". It's too high of a bar to prove that AI will "wipe out humanity". It's sorta like climate change, it's easier to show that weather patterns are becoming increasingly dangerous.
not just, its also very likley to be the tool used to create civil unrest and even war.
the damage it can do to the masses by misinformation or ragebating by feeding everyone its own paticular echo chamber is was too often not even spoken about.
Agreed, and while I want to see AGI come into existence, I'm also for policies aimed at harm reduction. This doesn't have to be an all or nothing form of argument.
I can't imagine why someone would be reluctant to outline details of how to build a bioweapon to an audience of millions.