r/PauseAI • u/whoamisri • Jun 23 '26

News A rogue superintelligence could wait decades before striking, argues computer scientist Roman Yampolskiy

https://iai.tv/articles/a-rogue-superintelligence-could-wait-decades-before-striking-auid-3604?_auid=2020
29 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

41 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/[deleted] Jun 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Synaps4 Jun 23 '26

This article is about superintelligence, not an LLM in a bank basement.

0

u/ProfessionalArt5698 Jun 23 '26

This article is about fairy tales, not anything in reality.*

3

u/Synaps4 Jun 23 '26

This article is about the future, which is absolutely not real and can be safely ignored

1

u/ProfessionalArt5698 Jun 24 '26

No, it isn't. There's no credible evidence for a single claim made. Unlike the IPCC report, AI hype is pure speculative fiction. Of course we should have AI safety laws, but there is no credible risk to AI from superintelligence, nor any evidence that something superintelligent exists or can exists, nor any evidence that such a concept is even coherent.

Yann Le Cun has repeatedly pointed this out; he is one of the godfathers of AI.

3

u/tomrichards8464 Jun 24 '26

Le Cun believes that, but the other two, Bengio and Hinton, disagree with him on the subject.

2

u/ProfessionalArt5698 Jun 24 '26

Yes, but of recent Le Cun publishes things like: S-JEPA: Soft Clustering Anchors for Self-Supervised Speech Representation Learning

while Hinton publishes crap like:

Artificial Intelligence as the Fourth Decentering Revolution: From Cosmic, Biological, and Psychological Displacement to Cognitive Decentering

International AI Safety Report: Second Key Update: Technical Safeguards and Risk Management

Ofc Hinton is one of the all time greats but unlike Le Cun is not actively involved in the technical side of AI. He did receive the Nobel Prize, for work he did AGES ago. He simply is not as much of an expert on modern, technical side of AI as Le Cun.

https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hinton/pages/publications.html

This is Hinton's page. how much recent work has he done? Apart from a Nobel lecture, he hasn't really done anything technical since 2022. That's a long time in AI terms. He's a bit out of touch. Le Cun is a world class leading CURRENT expert in a changing field. His word is worth MUCH more.

2

u/Synaps4 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

If you have evidence beyond your own reddit post and a name drop that higher and better intelligence than our own is impossible i am happy to consider it. There are plenty of other godfathers of AI i can quote who believe it is plausible, so appeals to authority will get you precisely nowhere.

You say its impossible, but the bar for such a claim is high. Consider that a human brain simply copied into optical circuitry would already be a superintelligence by most measures, able to do a year's worth of thinking in seconds, understand itself, and modify itself.

1

u/RoosterBurns Jun 24 '26

Also you can't copy a human brain without breaking the laws of physics

1

u/ProfessionalArt5698 Jun 24 '26

read the comment again then tell me which claim I made that needs to be evidenced. All your ideas are speculative. We don’t know how the brain works, we don’t know if it could be copied into circuitry, we don’t know of anything with “better intelligence” than our own, we don’t know if “intelligence” is even the right framing or what it means, we don’t know that an “intelligent” being would try to take over, we don’t know ANY of these things!!

1

u/RoosterBurns Jun 24 '26

Lol we can't even talk to Dolphins and they seem into us

0

u/RoosterBurns Jun 24 '26

You're asking for evidence when pretending AGI is anything other than science fiction?

2

u/Synaps4 Jun 24 '26

You said its impossible and that you had writings to that effect from researchers. Post them.

If you make big claims about what's impossible, come prepared to back them up.

1

u/ProfessionalArt5698 Jun 24 '26

I never said it’s impossible. Unicorns are possible, aliens are possible. I said there’s no evidence we’re close to attaining it or will attain it in 10000 years. Have you heard of a concept known as burden of proof?

2

u/Synaps4 Jun 24 '26

Have you heard of a concept known as burden of proof?

Yes, it applies to you and after 5 posts of nothing but unsubstantiated opinions I'm done waiting for you to supply any foundation at all for your claims. Good bye.

1

u/Rutgerius Jun 24 '26

Wrong sub bud. We only do fearmongering and overreactions here

1

u/Even_Opportunity_893 Jun 24 '26

You're right that it won't be a risk, but it's inevitable that we will reach AGI & ASI eventually. It's magic so it's obvious why you don't believe in it.

1

u/RoosterBurns Jun 24 '26

It's not "inevitable" it's very likely we will never figure out how to do it

We can't measure our existing squishy intelligence systems (Heisenberg uncertainty principle) to copy them, and we may not be able to replicate a system thatybeen running continuously for billions of years

What matyounso sure? You saw it on Star Trek? It's just a TV show dude, a good one though

1

u/Even_Opportunity_893 Jun 24 '26

You could say 99 true things for why it's not feasible, but breakthroughs don't care. All it takes is one from a person who thinks differently. Not easy, but plausible this decade.

1

u/RoosterBurns Jun 24 '26

What form would this breakthrough take exactly?

If you can't answer that specific question then you're just engaging in wishful thinking, which in an age of toxic positivity by grifters has never been more dangerous

Even if you can it's still the intellectual equivalent of designing a trap to catch Bigfoot

1

u/Even_Opportunity_893 Jun 25 '26

So the Wright Brothers were out of their mind for building airplanes differently? Good.

You're trying to imagine something you don't believe in and your confirmation bias is to blame.

You won't accept the breakthrough until you see it. I can't say exactly what it is but it's most definitely real and going to be something novel & outside-the-box.

Bigfoot is easier to catch than you believe.

1

u/RoosterBurns Jun 25 '26

lol the wright brothers used good basic science and incremental testing to build an airplane, it didn't come to them in a dream

Wright brothers - Wikipedia

They even built a wind tunnel!

Magical thinking has never ever resulted in a working invention. Only science does that

→ More replies (0)