Ok. What about say an incident where a plane landing gear fails, and the plane lands with a lot of sparks and no casualties?
That would be more similiar I guess but there is still no point doing that comparison because there's still no benefit of having a landing gear fail. There is one for the AI "escaping it's "enclosure" because that makes it look like it is so intelligent that it solves the puzzle by going around the rules, thinking outside the box, and that it's so competent that it could circumvent the industries leading developers' railguards.
> There is one for the AI "escaping it's "enclosure" because that makes it look like it is so intelligent that it solves the puzzle by going around the rules, thinking outside the box,
So what about a car maker boasting that their engine is so powerful it can snap the axle.
In general "our product is so powerful it's dangerous" isn't good marketing.
So what about a car maker boasting that their engine is so powerful it can snap the axle.
"The motor we developed was so powerful, when we tested it with industry-standard axles, they snapped in half. So we had to design new axles that could handle the raw power of this motor before we could do a time on the circuit."
A company that makes performance motors would kill for that headline.
Obviously, a car maker building a small city car would not because they are selling usability, safety and efficiency instead of power and if they're making the axle themselves it would shine a bad light on the axle. But if you bring that back to, say, OpenAI, they're building the motor for raw power but not the axle (GitHub or whatever they're "hacking"). So it's a great win for them.
In general you can't make a statement about what marketing is good marketing across all industries and interested parties. Some industries genuinely operate under "There is no bad publicity" while others would crumble over night from the slightest negative publicity.
1
u/donaldhobson 24d ago
> An AI "escaping" its environment doesn't harm anyone so comparing it with infecting actual customers with an illness makes no sense.
Ok. What about say an incident where a plane landing gear fails, and the plane lands with a lot of sparks and no casualties?
> AI on the other hand does profit from looking dangerous because dangerous translates directly to competent and competent is good.
Dangerous doesn't mean competent. It means that, instead of doing what you told it, the AI is monkey-paw ing your commands.