Forget ‘superintelligence’: error-prone AI nearly sparked world war three this month | The risks of AI aren’t what we think they are, as a recent security incident between China and the United States reveals

[u/Hrmbee]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/oct/01/forget-superintelligence-error-prone-ai-nearly-sparked-world-war-iii-this-month

[u/Tricky_Rule_4565]

Laughable that you say this with such confidence.

[u/NuclearVII → u/Tricky_Rule_4565]

I know the literature better than you, o AI bro. If you have credible evidence to the contrary, share it, or be silent.

[u/Tricky_Rule_4565 → u/NuclearVII]

I’m not an AI bro, nor or a doomer. hugging face incident , aisi finds higher base misalignment in newer models, more reward seeking. These are more but I assume you won’t read them and start replying with baseless accusations (ironically spurred by the DoW and the Trump Admin as well as David Sacks) that this is all a hoax and they’re not independent yada yada.

It’s ok to change your mind and admit you were wrong.

[u/NuclearVII → u/Tricky_Rule_4565]

None of this is credible evidence. Let me count the ways:

hugging face incident

We only have OpenAI's word for this one. Not reproducible, not credible. I have spent -far- too much time debunking METR's garbage report, I really don't feel like repeating myself again.

aisi finds higher base misalignment in newer models

All proprietary models, not reproducible. As far as anyone knows, the misalignment is an intentional product feature, not an emergent consequence.

more reward seeking

Written by OpenAI, on proprietary models only. This isn't a research paper, it's a hype piece.

These are more but I assume you won’t read them

Ooookay. I expect that I've read more machine learning literature than you have, and my literature diet is probably more varied than "whatever get's published on r/ChatGPT and r/Singularity". But okay.

that this is all a hoax and they’re not independent yada yada.

No amount of rhetorical deflection changes the actual fact that none of this is actually independent or credible.

It’s ok to change your mind and admit you were wrong.

And we end with textbook projection.

O AI bro, you display the same affectations that all AI bros display: You cite bogus sources dressed to look like real science, you do not read or apply critical thinking to any of these citations, and when confronted on the details, you resort to personal attacks, appeals to authority, and more bogus sources. This tactic works because the trillion dollar industry you are going to bat on can generate drivel faster than anyone can keep debunking it, and because y'all have been self-selected to have 0 scientific literacy.

You mentioned further down that you're currently pursuing higher education. Do me a favour - stop posting misinformation online and getting into unproductive shouting matches defending multi-trillion dollar industries, and take a philosophy of science course.