"There are people who think different than me. The best thing would be to mock them and call them stupid"
You've discovered the unofficial HN motto.
AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
11–20 of 26 posts
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#12We are nowhere near AGI. Bleeding edge LLMs are frustratingly dumb. There's no doom out there, just boredom.
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#13I am not an AI doomer, nor overly concerned with AI risk, but this post isn't a good rebuttal to the AI doomers. It mostly says "Nuh-uh, you're all being stupid".
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#14Remove all safety breaks, ignore the doomers, accelerate, maximize profits.
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#15AI doomer doomers are probably wrong too. Call me an optimist, I think any real doom will be accounted for or caught in time before it reaches doom status.
In today's world, where is your confidence coming from? Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but when studying WWII in school, I was always baffled by how the people could allow such people to become in charge. I always felt like nothing like that could happen today because as a society, we've learned what can happen and quash it before it gets to that point again. Yet, here I sit today amazed that it isn't being quashed.
So, the reasoning for my disagreeing is largely based on the lack of evidence that as a society we just can't help but fire the footguns
Edit: also, let's also look at the precedence on the decisions made by the socials on how companies will use tech/data/manipulation/etc. not good there either
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#16"There are people who think different than me. The best thing would be to mock them and call them stupid"
Would be funny if the post was written using ChatGPT.
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#17> But there are plenty of people who do believe that AI either will or might kill all of humanity, and they take this idea very seriously. They don’t just think “AI could take our jobs” or “AI could accidentally cause a big disaster” or “AI will be bad for the environment/capitalism/copyright/etc”. They think that AI is advancing so fast that pretty soon we’re going to create a godlike artificial intelligence which will really, truly kill every single human on the planet in service of some inscrutable AI goal. These folks exist.
Yes, these people exist, but they are so few that this argument is essentially a strawman. "AI could take our jobs" is a valid concern, and it is something that our political structures are wholly incapable of dealing with.
Most "AI Doomers" aren't worried about Skynet, they're worried about 90% unemployment.
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#18[deleted]
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#19> But there are plenty of people who do believe that AI either will or might kill all of humanity, and they take this idea very seriously. They don’t just think “AI could take our jobs” or “AI could accidentally cause a big disaster” or “AI will be bad for the environment/capitalism/copyright/etc”. They think that AI is advancing so fast that pretty soon we’re going to create a godlike artificial intelligence which w…
Not true, most AI doomers are actually worried about Skynet.
Re: AI Doomers are worse than wrong – they're incompetent
#20This is like calling the nuclear anti-proliferationists useless when they had just gotten started. AGI has only been in the general public's consciousness for about a year since ChatGPT released (before then far fewer people were worried about AGI as it seemed to most to be decades away at least). I think it's a bit early to throw in the towel and call them useless. Making progress in this area is difficult, which is why it needs considerable time and money thrown at it. The only real solution is to fund alignment research, putting a halt to actual research is unachievable as you can't police that world over.
I also find any argument saying 'don't worry about AI' as completely illogical, and unlike the author i don't mind stating why. I have yet to hear any arguments that are sufficiently persuasive to convince me that there is zero risk from AGI. I am an AI researcher, and while I think a lot of the risk are over blown, I cannot prove that AI is not some sort of existential risk. Even if you put the likelihood of that at less than 1%, that's still warrants a lot of research and effort to help prevent that from happening. There are no second chances, once the world ends that it. Life is not a video game. This is true of any sufficiently powerful technology, if it gets into the wrong hands or is abused, it can be very dangerous. Einstein didn't think up general relativity to develop nuclear weapons.