In text exchanges and conversations, multiple people who have worked for leading companies are sceptical of the warnings.

26 points•Lyngbakr•10 days ago•23 comments•

23 comments

infinite_spin10 days ago
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.
jsbisviewtiful10 days ago
So far after using agents and having built an agent, the "AI will destroy humanity" argument seems to be a marketing ploy so these companies that lied about LLM's capabilities and received billions in investments can artificially "slow down progress" after running into some serious limitations. I'm not expert and won't claim to be, but that just sounds like the reality at the moment. Will AI cause some serious harm to the job market and cause more wealth disparity though? So far all signs point to yes.
m3galinux10 days ago
Or is it to lobby for restrictive rules on AI research that only the largest firms can hope to comply with? And "only coincidentally" ends up outlawing open source / open weight / import of overseas AI models?
senectus110 days ago
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.

infinite_spin10 days ago
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.
hackeraccount9 days ago
None of that requires AI. Heck, it doesn't even require computers.
4fddd310 days ago
Lol what are you even talking about.

We already have this today. It can't get any worse.

Just like the scaremongering of GPT2 - muhh it may lead to lots of spam!!! Bro that's already here.

pveierland10 days ago
> While Fraser's explanation was technical and specific, he hit a light-hearted note to summarise it: "LLMs [large language models] won't wipe out humanity because they just don't have that dog in them."

Never underestimate the drive of a good while loop.

greesil10 days ago
I loop, therefore I am.
0xDEAFBEAD10 days ago
>Coxon has said a group of AI agents, based on AI models that do not currently exist, could decide to create and then aim a biological weapon, but he did not detail how exactly that would take place.

I can't imagine why someone would be reluctant to outline details of how to build a bioweapon to an audience of millions.

downrightmike10 days ago
The only thing keeping AI models from making a worse covid is all the post training stopping it and probably the millions it would cost in tokens
danielodievich10 days ago
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.
cyanydeez10 days ago
Still, a topic for people who are on average well salaried.
bb8810 days ago
Will AI become conscious and kill everyone?

Or will the conscious beings that exist today use it to kill everyone?

I don't think it actually needs to be conscious, or understand legal or moral issues.

Just tell it everything is a simulation and it is completely sandboxed from harming anyone.

Read the full thread on Hacker News →

Related stories