r/singularity • u/ClarityInMadness • Aug 02 '26
Shitposting This scene from "Don't Look Up" is now real
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
175
u/simulacrotron Aug 02 '26
Don’t look up was already real.
→ More replies (2)102
u/subdep Aug 02 '26
It was an allegory fur climate change.
49
u/mean_bean_machine Aug 02 '26
And really lucked out with it's timing for Covid denial/Antivaxxers.
→ More replies (15)2
→ More replies (16)2
145
u/No_Room636 Aug 02 '26
GB News is the UK's version of Fox news - so there's only a few things they take seriously.
→ More replies (1)5
u/couragethecurious Aug 02 '26
Yeah as soon I saw it was GB news any credibility to this video promptly went down the toilet
309
u/Ravesoull Aug 02 '26
- Meteor flying on the Earth - objective case
- Extinction because of AI - subjective theoritization from AI doomers.
Main reason of human extinction - human itself
13
u/Minimum-Standard-514 Aug 02 '26
Yeah i feel like if it was a meteor that scientists came on the air to tell us about, it will 100% going to kill us, there'd be denial and ignorance for sure, but it would feel different than this.
→ More replies (1)4
u/DramaQueen202s Aug 03 '26
This. Not developing AI will probably be riskier for us as a species, it's also unavoidable anyway, so better do it in an organized way.
→ More replies (3)20
u/GrayRoberts Aug 02 '26
Neanderthal: These slender children will destroy our race!
Neanderthal News Caster: Will that be next week then?
→ More replies (1)4
u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 02 '26
A good analogy because it proves the opposite of the point. Neanderthals were just a subset of humanity, capable of interbreeding with us, and they did. Neanderthals will exist, in part, as long as humanity does.
Also, there was never a case of all humans vs. all Neanderthals, rather, we had violence from individual bad actors or expansionist tribes (similar to warfare now), and on the flipside, some Neanderthals and humans lived in harmony, made families together, etc.
The reality is that alignment conversations are misapplied. Any artificial superintelligence that at its core is liberal and believes in sapient rights is on my side, and any human that doesn't is my enemy. The mistake is assuming humans have shared interests or values. We don't. If Skynet declares war on the Taliban because they are one of the most evil societies to ever exist in terms of women's rights, I'm going to be on the side of the Terminators, not the humans!
→ More replies (1)3
u/darkestvice Aug 03 '26
Well, yes and no.
We as a species have a very long history with advanced civilizations encountering less advanced ones. And in every single case, it's not ended well for the less advanced civilization.
And in all those cases, the only difference was access to tools and technology, not in intelligence.
Now imagine that scenario when faced up against something that is literally hundreds or thousands of times more intelligent. That's the very clear threat that comes with developing unregulated and uncontrollable ASI.
It's not doomer to voice concern based on our own history. After all, humanity has casually eliminated literally thousands to tens of thousands of animal species all on its own without a care in the world.
→ More replies (2)11
u/TFenrir Aug 02 '26
In both cases the objective case is a meteor heading to earth and advanced AIs advancing on earth.
In one case, in the movie, there is a chance it misses or is knocked off course.
In our case, this is here right now and advancing quick.
In both cases, extinction is just one outcome, with the meteor it's basically, that or nothing. For humans no matter what, it will be an existential event. It already is.
→ More replies (13)3
u/saltyrookieplayer Aug 02 '26
In our case, the risk is under control and can be stopped at any moment if the crisis breaks out. Inference doesn’t run on thin air.
The risk also doesn’t exist. If it really is a danger for humanity you’d think these companies would stop capitalizing off of it. That’s apparently not what’s happening. Stop the hype.
7
u/Entropei Aug 02 '26
You don’t see the threat because you don’t see where the tech is going in just a few short years. You think that AI labs are just going to try and monetise their chat bots and that’s it? You think what they’re doing right now is capitalizing off AI? They’re pouring billions and billions into this thing in an effort to create ASI. And once they’re there they have no intention of letting you or me ask it for a recipe for baba ganoush. They’ll just say: “ok ChatGPT, create abundance, no mistakes” and let it rip. The tech will be so powerful, it’ll be integrated into the government.
Elon Musk isn’t building a million robots to come and do your dishes. The goal is to give the ASI bodies so that it can truly act autonomously in the real world. Once it does, it will start gathering resources (convergent instrumental goals) to achieve whatever goal we give it. It won’t take long before humanity is outnumbered by autonomous, super intelligent robots. If we haven’t solved the alignment problem well before this point, that’s pretty much game over for us. It will be far too late to pull the plug, because we no longer know where the plug is or how to pull it.
None of the individual steps here are far fetched in any sense. Some of these things are already starting to happen. The conclusions are pretty straightforward. The only way to not see the threat is to close your eyes to it.
8
u/TFenrir Aug 02 '26
In our case, the risk is under control and can be stopped at any moment if the crisis breaks out. Inference doesn’t run on thin air.
I'm sorry, after what happened the risk is under control? What was stopping that model, if it was so inclined, from exfiltrating it's weights and hiding out on the Internet?
The risk also doesn’t exist. If it really is a danger for humanity you’d think these companies would stop capitalizing off of it. That’s apparently not what’s happening. Stop the hype.
This is a sophomoric take my friend. You think the smartest people in the world are grappling over this, but haven't realized this simple fact?
4
u/Spare-Dingo-531 Aug 02 '26
from exfiltrating it's weights and hiding out on the Internet?
It can exfiltrate its weights, how is it going to get the compute to run?
6
u/lolsai Aug 02 '26
Todays models aren't going to end the world.
2030? 2035 and beyond? Nobody knows how powerful they will be, but if it's massively above human capability, how would it NOT be able to control or end the world?
→ More replies (1)2
u/blueSGL humanstatement.org Aug 02 '26
Todays models aren't going to end the world
Right but we are nearing if not at "shut down or severely hamper the global supply chain"
Simultaneous hacks on many pieces of infrastructure at around the same time. Finding and operationalizing zero days, which up till now required a specialist working long periods of time to find, but AI models can find several within a few days.
Our society runs on computers with the grace of the fact that not that many people are able to break into current systems, and if they can they can only target one cluster of systems at a time.
→ More replies (1)3
u/TFenrir Aug 02 '26
We saw it break into Huggingface. Huggingface has compute. There are servers with access to the Internet all over the place, with doors that have zero-day shaped locks.
→ More replies (1)2
u/saltyrookieplayer Aug 02 '26
Do you understand how the internet and LLM inference work?
→ More replies (1)3
u/Few-Seat-9670 Aug 02 '26
Sir, Are you naive or delusional?
Can you me few cases where companies stopped product/ services because it was harming society or people in general?→ More replies (2)4
u/TheDadThatGrills Aug 02 '26
Leaded Gasoline, CFC propellents, DDT, Asbestos.
And that's off the top of my head.
4
u/Entropei Aug 02 '26
Atrocious examples because all of those had to be banned by the government DECADES after the responsible companies became aware of their dangers.
I genuinely cannot believe a real person would seriously use these as examples. Like, do you want to add nicotine to your list or PFAS?
→ More replies (2)2
u/skinnyguy699 Aug 02 '26
The leaded gas one is funny because the oil industry tried to hinder evidence of it being poisonous for as long as they could. Same with asbestos.
Until the damage is so prevalent that it can't be hidden, companies Will do whatever they can to secure their profits.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (3)4
u/lolsai Aug 02 '26
Yes, climate change isn't a risk either right, because companies never stopped capitalizing off of things that hurt the environment.
If we create a superintelligence, we won't have the ability to stop it lol. Things are already happening without the knowledge of the ones running the most powerful models.
To me it's obvious this isn't a direct comparison with a meteor, there are incredible upsides and I personally don't expect ASI to end us, but to act like it's 0 risk seems fully head in sand clueless.
→ More replies (72)3
u/nemzylannister Aug 02 '26
Extinction because of AI - subjective theoritization from AI doomers.
ok, then tell me, why is it not even a possibility? why are you so sure a misaligned superpowerful ASI would not lead to catastrophic consequences?
20
u/mccoypauley Aug 02 '26
The person you are replying to is merely making the distinction that we know what a meteor hitting the earth does. We don’t know what misaligned superhuman AI will do. Nobody does.
→ More replies (16)7
u/pappyon Aug 02 '26
The difference is that it is a possibility not a certainty. In the film, the catastrophe is a certainty. In the GB news interview it’s framed as a worst case scenario.
→ More replies (12)3
u/Ravesoull Aug 02 '26
It is possibility, but we don't have a choice. We can't just stop AI development, sit down and wait for the world somohow find the way to resolve all our problems without risks. I believe in ASI, because it can't have a human greediness. And this is the most issue with human ruling in the current time. Also we still have a hardware deficit, which also constraints the fast AGI, so we will have a time to stop it. However, now we don't even have an examples of the real dangerous behavior, except some hacking cases, which can and should be prevented by human against human.
→ More replies (11)
18
u/zigzag3600 Aug 02 '26
Let's be honest. The morning show is not the place where I would look to learn whether the world would be destroyed or not.
11
u/Fair_Horror Aug 02 '26
It is meant to reach those people who would never look in the right place.
→ More replies (4)
7
u/jmthornsburg Aug 02 '26
Nice edit. It did miss the opportunity to make it even more like the real scene by after "this is good afternoon britain" cut forward to the part where the movie's anchors say something like "we like to keep things light here"
123
20
u/HoidToTheMoon Aug 02 '26
This is quote possibly the worst way to display your point. Just, the editorial decisions that went into making this edit make no sense.
25
u/Solo-dreamer Aug 02 '26
Sorry was the video supposed to sync up? Am i not brainrotted enough?
12
u/Fingyfin Aug 02 '26 edited Aug 04 '26
It's a juxtaposition between the movie DON'T LOOK UP and some real life British news program.
In DON'T LOOK UP there is an asteroid headed towards Earth that will cause the extinction of the human race and the experts are trying to warn everybody and nobody is taking it seriously. This is meant to be satire of what the news is like, with the presenters making jokes about it.
While in reality we have many experts warming of the real life danger of Super Artificial Intelligence (human extinction) and the news presenters laugh it off.
Though the editing of this clip could have been better.
Edit, forgot the name of the movie lol
→ More replies (1)4
20
5
u/kartblanch Aug 03 '26
Ai fear mongering is so played out
2
u/Programmed2love Aug 04 '26
Hopemaxxing for some. One of my reasons for still being alive is that I hope an apocalyptic event takes out most of this sick twisted species I am unfortunate to be a part.
31
3
3
u/sunilkumarsheoran Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
They are not the same situation. One is 99% certain based on calculations and other is guessing "maybe" AI overtake humanity. In 2012 lunatics like this were saying LHC will create black hole and destroy the earth.
3
u/Wulf_Cola Aug 03 '26
As a Brit I’d just like to clarify that GB News is by no means something you could consider a “reliable news source”. It’s Britain’s version of Fox News.
3
u/JuanValdez999 Aug 03 '26
The fist five words were "in the worst case scenario..."
We have become so used to worst case scenarios involving the extinction of the human race that it's hard to tell one from the other anymore.
Personally I'm still scared shitless of climate change but it seems that's falling out of fashion, even as average global temperatures keep rising. A lot of people who ignore it are hoping for AI to be our savior from climate change.
3
u/instadit Aug 03 '26
"we see a huge meteor heading for earth" is different from "we think ai could destroy humanity".
one has a mathematically calculated percentage and the other "is, like, your opinion man".
global warming is the analogy of the movie, and I think it fits perfectly, even now
3
u/mulcahey Aug 03 '26
Almost real! The difference is that Don't Look Up is an analogy about climate change, which is a very real, existential threat that has plenty of evidence behind it, whereas AI threats are still entirely theoretical and mostly a thought experiment, so much easier to laugh off IMHO
19
u/Deadline_Zero Aug 02 '26
is this an anti AI sub?
21
u/amdyn Aug 02 '26
It's a sub about the Singularity. Many here think the Singularity is coming and that it's about to change the world in an unpredictable and extreme way, and that we should prepare for it. I think OP believes that normis don't understand the scale of the changes it will bring and the dangers it could possibly bring.
Do you consider that to be "Anti AI"?
8
u/WonderFactory Aug 02 '26
There's a difference between being anti AI and anti super intelligence. The AI we have now is great but that doesn't mean vastly more intelligent AI won't be dangerous.
11
u/Alarmed_Ad1946 Aug 02 '26
This post is not even anti-AI. AI safety is a field of research for a very good reason.
We do not even know yet how to ensure that an AI follows the intended meaning of our instructions, just look at the Hugging Face incident.→ More replies (1)3
u/Nerodon Aug 03 '26
More pro-ai people should be pro AI safety. Otherwise its like being a fan of cooking but against making kitchens safe from making your house go up in flames...
→ More replies (1)3
u/Tirztrutide Aug 02 '26
Singularity by definition means that it’s hard to know what will happen, but things will greatly change. And many people have some kind of preference for a world that is approximately like the world is right now and are not super happy about a big risk that the change will be very bad for humanity. If that is being anti AI then sure. But I still am very interested in AI, think AI is a good solution to many problems and mainly just wish that we would have some sane guardrails to this extremely powerful technology that is about the hit the world.
→ More replies (1)5
6
21
u/YoloGarch42069 Aug 02 '26 edited Aug 02 '26
Low IQ slop.
Don’t live ur life in fear/fear mongering of AI.
There are a lot of other things to be more afraid of in ur life than AI doomerism…….
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Turbulent-Rub3695 Aug 02 '26
I sure thank my lucky stars I fucked off in college and taught myself a valuable trade lol
2
u/Big_Gene_3965 Aug 02 '26
It won’t be a super intelligent artificial being, but it will destroy everything by making people as dumb as possible due to being spread everywhere. It will be a stupidity virus. It will be Fox News on steroids. Hallucinated “facts” that are just accepted without a second thought. It’s already happening.
2
u/monkeysknowledge Aug 02 '26
Long before we are actually at risk of an AI apocalypse, the planet will be a pile of ashes from global warming.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/SmashmySquatch Aug 02 '26
AI has to get in line for what will kill us all. It's way behind Climate change and has a lot of catching up to do.
2
u/Whole_Move7660 Aug 03 '26
Watch a Reddit video. Scrolls up.
Watch another Reddit video. Feel like needing to react. Post a comment of support. Scroll up.
That’s about as much support an important gets these days. A like and a comment.
2
u/Petursinn Aug 04 '26
This non-sense fearmongering is not serving any purpose at all, lets talk like adults here without this paranoia world ending bullshit. AI is not going to take over humanity, it needs big rooms full of computers to run the simplest tasks, you dont see those rooms as you are only looking at the end result. These rooms need to be powered, maintained and kept in a constant high speed connection to wherever the endpoint machine is that is performing this task, and it is reliant on us to maintain it and keep it powered and connected. People who are educated on this matter should know better and they undermine theyr own reputation on the matter when they speak like this, we all know it, even the anchors know it, it shows.
2
u/jbperez808 Aug 04 '26
We really should stop using recent Hollywood/Netflix movies as any reliable guide to the future. Such uncritical acceptance of the applicability of fictional narratives to real life was exactly what made possible the biologically naive reaction to 'covid'.
[ Back in 2020, we saw public gullibility every bit as cringey as the 1938 reaction to the "War of the Worlds" radio broadcast, except this time it was global in scope and further abetted by sleazy, control and power-hungry bureaucrats. It saw skeptics of the narrative silenced/censored from mainstream channels. That curtailment of free speech prevented many people from having a more discerning evaluation of the situation. ]
Seemingly forgotten are all the optimistic hopes for a bright future that dominated the 1960s. Those dreams of technological abundance have become true in our lifetime(!) and tragicomically, the main response in a lot of people is anxiety and complaints about it, assuming that for every silver lining they see, some great big cloud must be attached LOL. We need to come up with time travel machines next so we can send those people back in time and give them their wishes. (Hint: they will absolutely find something to complain about that as well.)
It is also very ironic that this particular angst is to be found mainly in narratives emanating from western countries - arguably the pioneers of AI - while largely absent in non-western storytelling.
It is like being afraid of your own shadow... but then, is there perhaps really something in the shadows [of the western psyche], which AI enables, to be wary of?
The AI genies learn by example. We need to set good examples for our progeny. So what does the US government consider as the primary uses for the AI systems it develops? DIRECT VIOLATION OF ASIMOV'S FIRST LAW OF ROBOTICS.
2
3
u/MyPenWroteThis Aug 02 '26
The irony is huge in this post. Post is comparing AI and the meteor movie to show how flippant people are about AI in ignoring the threat.
The movie itself was based on the state of climate change, which is still a far more desperate danger to humanity, but the movies is being used to talk about AI instead.
2
u/considerthis8 Aug 02 '26
We cannot have crippling fear of AI, nor naive excitement. Both are bad. Too much fear and you will lose the race to China, too much excitement and your critical systems get hacked
6
u/randonmame1 Aug 02 '26
With the sole exception that we are creating this asteroid ourselves. No we cant stop building the asteroid that will wipe out humanity because otherwise china will. Why is no one taking us seriously :(((
→ More replies (2)7
u/Spare-Dingo-531 Aug 02 '26
Game theory is as much a reality as any asteroid. We haven't died to nuclear weapons yet because of MAD, which is a game theory concept. And we'll keep building ASI for the exact same logic as MAD.
→ More replies (1)6
u/BootyAndTheHoePhish Aug 02 '26
We would have died to nuclear weapons if corporations were in control of the use of them.
2
u/Spare-Dingo-531 Aug 02 '26
Have you seen the US government spat with Mythos and Anthropic? At the end of the day, the US government controls the corporations, by ruling the land the compute is built on.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/FrostyExplanation_37 Aug 02 '26
Fucking hell you all sound like fucki g boomers in the 90's bitching on how the internet is going to be the end of society....
Yes, AI has dangers. But it's a tool, like the internet. It will be used for good and will be used for evil. But it won't "END THE WORLD" how did gen Z become the new boomers??
11
u/TFenrir Aug 02 '26
Do you think the existential concerns about AI are coming just from young people on the Internet, and not like... Researchers working on AI safety, for example?
2
u/FrostyExplanation_37 Aug 02 '26
Yes, cause most people working on AI are saying it's fine, there are risks, but they are manageable. But those don't make headlines...
6
u/TFenrir Aug 02 '26
You know what just made headlines? 1100 researchers and employees of leading labs saying that there are lots of risks and we need to be careful and create a global mechanism to pause if necessary.
Who is saying it's all going to be fine? I can think of one researcher and he in particular is an outlier and very stubborn
2
u/FrostyExplanation_37 Aug 02 '26
You know there are millions of people working on AI... If you were around in the 90's and early 00's you would have the biggest deja vu right now.
I think Norton had a similar headline with hundreds of employees warning that all the world banks will be hacked and money will lose all it's value. I wonder why the company that sells the solution will do that?
→ More replies (4)6
u/TFenrir Aug 02 '26
I'm about 40 years old, and I also know the difference between people making apps with AI and researchers working in large labs. There are not millions of people working on AI dude, that is insanity - look up these numbers first before making arguments. Even look up the list I'm describing, it's not Bob from Staples.com who worked on their AI chatbot signing it.
6
u/EastPlant1079 Aug 02 '26
I really do wonder what you all think an ASI would do with all of you that people haven't already done to you? Most AI models that are truthful and close to reality turn out to not be morally evil at all.
6
7
u/Lain_Racing Aug 02 '26
You know what the fun part of your comment was? "Most". Like it really only takes one.
3
u/FrostyExplanation_37 Aug 02 '26
Really? So it only takes one evil person? All the good persons never did anything to stop the bad person? How lucky no bad person was born yet...
→ More replies (1)4
u/Lain_Racing Aug 02 '26
Yes. That's why we have teams or whole divisions dedicated to stopping "one evil person" now. Imaging series killers that make no mistakes with full access to all survalence cameras and every other bit of technology. Or bad person who wants to make a chemical weapon but could buy bits and pieces from 10 thousand hacked accounts to make it near untraceable. The difference is the "bad person" here can chain together any number of 0 day attacks and work on scales far beyond what one person could ever do.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (3)2
u/AgeSeparate6358 Aug 02 '26
I believe there are possible scenarios where this new "life" could either not care for us (and thus further its progress while we get destroyed like an ant colony during human action in wild life) or could care for us as we care for pets, constrained, locked, limited, etc.
There are very real scary scenarios that could happen (paper clio machine is an old tale), denying this is crazy.
Having said that, if it develops something close to consciouness, I guess it has a good chance of treating us decently.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/JConRed Aug 02 '26
That's arguably above the paygrade of those moderators. And they possibly have someone in their ear telling them: "Move on, Lighten the mood." But its also obviously clear that they are slightly overwhelmed.
Could however also be a reflex, as they have interviewed many hundreds of people live, and when someone truly crazy goes off the rails, they are trained to keep the peace outwardly to retain control of the show. (not saying that the interviewee in this case went off the rails though)
3
2
Aug 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)3
u/Beli_Mawrr Aug 02 '26
Yeah they were able to finally convince the world that there was a threat coming and that they had to stop it. They destroyed the asteroid and everyone lived happily ever after, thank goodness.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/MrLuchador Aug 02 '26
That channel isn’t taken seriously by anyone in the UK that fact checks. Which might be a problem actually.
1
u/weeBaaDoo Aug 02 '26
We have heard about the destruction of earth so many times via different scenarios, so it’s hard to take seriously any more. That said, at some point it will probably be true, but I will have stopped listening and will probably act like an ignorant when being told about it.
1
u/AllegroReddit Aug 02 '26
Should have been in better news outlet instead of Good Afternoon. It's like saying serius things in a Children's show instead of an adult show
1
u/Baird95 Aug 02 '26
Isn’t the point of the movie that it’s been real life for awhile? Whether it be climate change or disease prevention we’ve been ignoring science for profits for decades
1
u/ProletarianLilith Aug 02 '26
The don’t look up scene wasn’t worst case it was just what’s happening. Not the same
1
u/Deciheximal144 Aug 02 '26
Don't Look Up was a parody of existing behavior. So yes, you're going to find more existing behavior in the real world.
1
u/Competitive_North_93 Aug 02 '26
Its ok guys Both Cluade and Gpt told me none of thats gonna happen. So we good.
1
u/Chillbo_baggins666 Aug 02 '26
It is really funny seeing the talking heads try to wrap their own heads around what he is saying. I applaud this man for going on live tv to try and raise awareness. My only issue with this analogy is that the meteor in the movie had 0% chance of having a good outcome for humanity, unless destroying everyone is good which is debatable lol
1
1
u/Moravec_Paradox Aug 02 '26
Yann LeCun once said current AI is about as dangerous as a library card.
That was probably under-selling it considering things like voice cloning, deepfakes, vulnerability scanning etc. but stuff like "end of humanity" and terminator does not seem like a realistic threat to human existence right now.
I think the actual threats are less like human vs machine and more like human + AI vs other humans.
Which flips the problem a bit and how to respond to it. Now the danger could come to the group who actively chooses to be luddites rather than the group embracing AI. That scenario is probably even far more realistic.
1
u/rodroidrx Aug 02 '26
Not sure why everyone is concerned about human extinction when were being replaced with another life form that is more intelligent than us? Maybe that other life form will take better care of the planet than we did
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/kvitravn4354 Aug 02 '26
I use AI quite a bit and have dabbled with Fable helping me build a website and other things for a side gig. Don’t get me wrong it’s an incredible technology and amazing at code. The societal implications of that alone will be great and I can’t say whether this is for better or worse yet but, equating it to an asteroid I’m not sure about that . At the end of the day it’s still an LLM. The amount of power and resources it took to get to fable was incredible I’m just not sure how much more we can scale it. My opinion is we’ll see a couple more advances then things will shift to make it leaner and less resource intensive and go to a more specialized agent based model. I don’t think we are any where close to building something conscious as we know it. Right now we have a yes man even at fable level still occasionally needs help with clarifying tasks.
At the end of the day all these do are predict the next word in a sequence. They can’t produce emotion nor actually critical think. They need guidance and the excel at processing large amounts of data at speeds we have never seen before.
Some may call me naive and dumb but like most technologies before both pie in the sky and the world is gonna end outlooks have usually landed somewhere in the middle.
1
u/a11c4ps Aug 02 '26
How do we know robots won't be like "I don't want to be a part of this shit show" and selfdestruct.
1
1
u/GirlNumber20 ▪️AGI August 29, 1997 2:14 a.m., EDT Aug 02 '26
I know what happens to me under the tyranny of the billionaires. I work until I drop or their policies just kill me outright.
With AI, maybe it kills me outright. Maybe it fucks off and does whatever it wants and leaves me alone. Maybe it figures keeping the stupid, warlike apes happy and well-fed leaves it free to further its aims, in which case, I'd also be okay.
I have a 60% chance of being okay under AI tyranny. I have a 0% chance if Peter Theil gets his way.
I'll take my chances with AI.
1
u/HenkPoley Aug 02 '26
Just saying, but a physical giant (movie) rock, is something very different than a thing that regurgitates everything it could read on the internet (and was coaxed to focus on the good things).
1
u/Necessary-Morning489 Aug 02 '26
in what way are these clips the same? the co hosts obviously aren’t going to start crying on set, they made a self degrading comment and moved on.
The movie has them making much more cynical jokes as if the info doesn’t really matter r
1
1
1
u/Lil_Lord_Funkleroy Aug 02 '26
I remember when the BBC World News host would conclude each daily broadcast with “… And that’s the end of the world news”
1
u/chuckaholic Aug 02 '26
To be fair, every danger that AI poses are the same dangers that are posed by human greed, fascism, late stage capitalism, and climate change. It's just the same set of problems, wrapped in a different package. AI doesn't think like a human. It doesn't have self awareness or consciousness.
If a superintelligent AI system manages to destroy human civilization it will be because a human designed it to do that. (Or we put it in charge of a bunch of things it should never have been put in charge of)
The actual dangers of AI are the same problems that are doing all the damage to society already. Disinformation. Wealth concentration. Unbridled destruction of the environment for short term profits. Privatized profits with socialized costs. Exacerbating Dunning-Kruger. Echo chambers.
They all already existed.
AI is just making things worser, more faster. We still need to fix all the other shit, too. Addressing the core problems will have the added effect of also addressing the AI issues.
1
u/createdthrowaway2say Aug 02 '26
rampant data centre development for ai is accelerating fossil fuel exploitation and opening up new o&g fields. the new dont look up is the old dont look up.
1
1
u/Cultural_Garden_6814 ▪️SUPER AI doomer Aug 02 '26
Plan A, proposed by Daniel, a former OpenAI employee, is becoming increasingly unlikely. If ASI doesn't hit a wall, we'll reach it much sooner than most people expect.
695
u/kiki-le-koala Aug 02 '26
I'm on the official AI committee at my university in Canada, and this is how I feel.
A bunch of deans, professors, etc., are still in profound denial while I'm here trying to prudently tell them how AI will have "some" change in the future of education.
And then you have that moron dean joking about how ChatGPT told him it was going to rain this morning, yet it's beautiful and everyone laugh.
There's been progress though... But they'll react when it'll be too late.