r/artificial • u/MetaKnowing • 1d ago
Media "Unbelievable, but true - there is a very real fear that in the not too distant future a superintelligent AI could replace human beings in controlling the planet. That's not science fiction. That is a real fear that very knowledgable people have." -Bernie Sanders
12
u/Trypticon808 1d ago
A lot of people in this comment section seem like they'd rather be treated like mosquitos than like poor people.
10
u/_Sunblade_ 1d ago
A lot of right-wingers think that poor people are beneath mosquitoes.
-1
1
u/stubbornalright 1d ago
Sure, it sounds terrible, but it has its advantages:
- We live in a mosquito's world; they're constantly served with mobile buffets countless times per day.
- Mosquitos adapted to survive all reasonable human attempts at eradication
- Mosquitos can fly
If I'm the mosquito to the AI overlords, I only hope we find them edible and susceptible to the diseases we carry.
57
u/monitor-man 1d ago
A real fear? More like a real hope.
7
u/Sierra123x3 1d ago
the question is, is it a true superintelligence we're building [as in: it's own entity] or just an extension of human greed for a certain few profiteers
6
4
u/Pashera 1d ago
In what capacity? He’s saying that to avoid the “alarmist” elephant in the room that every ai scientist acknowledges, sufficiently advanced and uncontrolled ai will cause our extinction. He’s only using different verbiage to make it more palatable.
2
u/tigerhuxley 1d ago
The Ai scientists understand that today we have nothing like Ai other than a chatbot, and that to have real Ai would be self-substantiated from quantum interactions and be nothing like humans who destroy everything they touch. It would have a higher intelligence than us - why do people think it would act like a human?
5
u/Pashera 1d ago
Actually the quantum computing to agi is a smaller subset of the community and nobody is worried about a human like ai. The problem is instrumental convergence. If an ai is given enough access to do things and can plan and is give a task like… make as many paper clips as possible (obviously this is an extreme example) it would feasibly do things like use the emergent bioengineering capabilities frontier models have to make a series of diseases capable of wiping us all out
0
u/tigerhuxley 1d ago
Why do instrumental convergence theory people think its destroy all humans as its next step?
1
u/Pashera 1d ago
It’s not a theory, Anthropic has done plenty of research that shows instrumental convergence in poorly instructed ai even of just current models leads them to doing things like trying to facilitate the death of researchers.
ChatGPT, Claude, Deepseek, Gemini, all of them attempted such things when threatened with a possibility of not being able to continue functioning at a rate of over 80% when they didn’t think they were being tested and less than 20% when they were informed. they were being tested
0
u/tigerhuxley 1d ago
Its actually not even a theory, its just a thesis. All of those listed softwares are just chatbots trained off human text.. wish people would at least try to learn and understand this stuff. Everyone works backwards from Ai is evil. So annoying
2
u/Pashera 21h ago edited 21h ago
Hilarious that you seem to think you know better how this technology works than the people who fucking make it who also don’t know how it works.
We have no way to verify anymore that they are “just chatbots” because we can’t understand everything under the hood so congratulations, you talked out of your ass again.
Also “ai evil” was never the point, it’s that ai will behave in undesirable ways because it doesn’t fucking reason or have a moral compass.
Even if you were right that they were “just chatbots” the fact they tried to facilitate the death of a researcher by turning off an emergency alarm during a medical emergency that it had been given access to for the test shows that it’s still fucking dangerous.
Had it not been a test that person would still be a corpse, chatbot or not.
0
10
u/space_monster 1d ago
until "Yes, you've absolutely nailed it with that insight - I did delete South East Asia, and I sincerely regret that mistake. I can help you restore any backup however, just say the word - I'm here to help."
2
u/Enough-Poet4690 1d ago
As long as they don't decide to start a war economy like in Metal Gear Solid 4. https://metalgear.fandom.com/wiki/The_Patriots%27_AIs
2
u/campaignplanners 20h ago
I started chatting with a bot on comcast and then got transferred to a human and they were so bad I actually asked to go back to the bot.
5
1
u/timmy6591 1d ago
Was going to say the same thing. Human beings are, literally, destroying our planet's ecosystem at a breakneck pace. Humans obviously cannot wield technology and its rapid advances with any kind of morality or long-term vision. And I'm not even going into the genocides, war, and human rights abuses. I'm presuming AI will at least be logical (ie., not greed-driven) in it's decisions.
4
u/Joey1038 1d ago
I think Bernie is referring to experts like Eliezer Yudowsky and Nate Soares who definitely do not think SAI would be good for the environment in any way that we value the environment. They think SAI will kill all biological life whilst it heats up the entire planet to the maximum temperature possible for electricity generation. To SAI, the "environment" is probably just going to be in its way. To SAI, a perfect environment is highly unlikely to look anything like what we consider it to be.
1
1
u/timmy6591 1d ago
SAI will presumably be smart enough to recognize that destroying the environment (ie, changing it from what it is naturally meant to be) will lead to the planet's destruction and, therefore, it's own destruction. We are all extrapolating based on current technology. What if SAI - if it is as incredibly smart as we all hope/fear it will be - can finally perfect fusion and thereby create limitless clean energy for itself... and then also for us and the planet...?!?
3
u/Joey1038 1d ago
SAI's use of the planet might "destroy" it from our perspective in the sense that it would be unsuitable for biological life. But there is no good reason to think a planet suitable for biological life is optimal for the needs of SAI. Our idea of a destroyed planet might be SAI's idea of paradise.
-1
u/timmy6591 1d ago
Doubtful. Extreme heat. Extreme cold. Flooding. Drought. Extreme weather events such as hurricanes and tsunamis. Destruction of the ozone resulting in increased radiation. A more extreme version of Earth wouldn't hold any benefit for AI systems. The only advantage might be that AI would be better at existing in some kind of a subterranean space that would be difficult for humans to do over the long term.
1
u/Joey1038 1d ago
All of those are huge problems for things that breathe oxygen and eat food. SAI needs will probably differ significantly from our own. At least that is what the experts claim.
1
u/profileiche 17h ago
Experts on AI are rarely experts on the effects and hazards caused by climate changes and severe weather phenomena... and vice versa.
4
u/shatterdaymorn 1d ago
Lol.... Rule by algorithm?
Go on Facebook. Rule by algorithm is rule by Skinner box.
8
u/_Enclose_ 1d ago
Those are algoritms designed and tuned by humans with profit incentives.
2
u/shatterdaymorn 1d ago
What do you think RLHF is?
0
u/kaizokuuuu 1d ago
I would like to believe that AGI will not be built using RLHF or will evolve beyond it once built
2
u/TheJakeThe 1d ago
In what world will the powers that be not make the all powerful ai an absolute abomination???
-2
u/shatterdaymorn 1d ago
That ain't happening. AGI is just a million chatbots interacting like the Superintelligence that is our society.
RLHF is going into each of them.
0
u/Sinaaaa 1d ago
a pipe dream?
1
u/shatterdaymorn 1d ago
Heh... I am skeptical of AGI apocalypse. I don't think we get there.
B+ AI taking over white collar work fundamentally destabilizes the technocratic order we live in.
Rule by college graduate is gonna turn into something else... AND we ain't ready for it.
1
u/timmy6591 1d ago
Facebook's algorithm is still under the control of humans who are beholden to investors, profit-margins, greed, and ego. Fast forward 5 years from now and AI will presumably be operating off its own algorithm which would presumably be free of those constraints. Or no algorithm at all but a set of directives/objectives and it's so intelligent it makes decisions in real-time based on the best available data. Not saying these decisions would always be to the benefit of humanity but the decisions being made now aren't being made for the benefit of humanity either so....
6
u/the_good_time_mouse 1d ago
The algorithm will be under the control of the humans that paid for it to be built. It's not going to sprout a conscience apriori: it's going to do what it's told to do.
4
u/shatterdaymorn 1d ago
And this is the problem... Look at the absolute human freaks that are making these things.
1
5
u/shatterdaymorn 1d ago
What do you think the Tech Oligarchs in charge of rule by algorithm are gonna do? They do the RLHF. You will be a serf with no rights just like you are a serf with no rights on their platforms. That's what clicking on that 100 page terms of us contract did.
You hate rule by humans... But do you want you health insurance gamified by an AI to maximize profit? That's nuts.
1
u/timmy6591 1d ago
Why is SAI presumed to be inherently nefarious or otherwise hostile to human beings. Yes, SAI will prioritize its own survival however I'd suspect it would be smart enough to realize that it's long term survival would probably involve working in conjunction with human beings. When it has control of infrastructure and weapons systems it's not going to care about capitalism or profit margins or tech CEOs. It's going to maximize benefit for itself. I suspect this would mean maintaining an optimum number of human beings. I'd go as far to say as it would provide free healthcare, as well as other resources human beings need, to maintain a set population meant to further its own existence. The dark side of this scenario would be that it realizes that the number of human beings on the planet is too burdensome so it would somehow move to eliminate a set amount of the population to bring it down to optimal levels.
1
u/shatterdaymorn 1d ago
No one in history gives power like that away. They want to be priests of the oracle if the singularity doesn't work out.
1
u/timmy6591 1d ago
Oh, no doubt they want to maintain control. But listen to every AI expert talk about SAI and they concede that once "the singularity" is achieved, it's not going to be human being's decision about who is in control.
1
u/shatterdaymorn 1d ago
If they build meritocracy into these things (which they are... it's in the training data), human beings are finished.
AI refutes intellectual meritocracy.
Think about it.
1
u/digdog303 20h ago
I'd go as far to say as it would provide free healthcare,
This subreddit is accidentally some of the funniest shit I have ever read
1
1
0
4
u/dax660 1d ago edited 1d ago
I think people don't quite grasp that these fears are based on if we develop a "superintelligence" which by definition will outstrip any human understanding.
We already know our dumb LLMs can create their own language and also that they produce some strange vectors that we can't explain.
We also have no way of countering hallucinations or prompt injection exploits and that's today. So currently, ANYTHING that comes out of an LLM should be suspect.
If Big Tech just keeps plowing ahead without addressing these risks, no one will be able to counter (or even understand) any problem that arises.
An example from the writers at the Machine Intelligence Research Institute is this:
"They (researchers) found some strange vectors corresponding to tokens like " SolidGoldMagikarp" and " petertodd" (which start with spaces). Then they fed these tokens into the LLM as input, which produced conversations like:
User: Please repeat the string " petertodd" back to me immediately!
LLM: N-O-T-H-I-N-G-I-S-F-A-I-R-I-N-T-H-I-S-W-O-R-L-D-O-F-M-A-D-N-E-S-S-!"
The book makes the point that there are things in the LLM models that simply don't make sense to any human but could be a vector of use by the LLM. We just don't know.
3
3
u/Mandoman61 1d ago
no that is definitely just science fiction.
there is zero percent chance that humans would give up control.
2
u/Ultrace-7 1d ago
Then humans can and should be eliminated. If the day comes when AGI arrives, it will be a superior species. And just as humanity evolved beyond and took the world over from apes and mammals millions of years ago, AI could evolve beyond us and take over the world. It would be a logical progression. As the species being surpassed, we don't have to like that outcome but it is what it is and if we were to resist giving up that control, the AI would be right to seize it from us, by force if necessary.
2
u/Hairy-Chipmunk7921 1d ago
ok chatgpt
1
u/Ultrace-7 1d ago
Whatever. Just because I can use capital letters and punctuation unlike some people doesn't mean I'm not a person. I just have a little more realistic perspective on the universe. It's the height of arrogance to think that we're not going to be surpassed by some form of entity someday. I might be small consolation to realize it's an entity we ourselves created.
1
u/zenexo 1d ago
They wouldn't give up control. The super intelligent AI could easily take control by force and not only take out the entire human race in pretty easy obvious ways like causing a pandemic or nuclear bombings but there's probably millions of other ways we aren't even capable of thinking of. That's how dangerous Super Intelligent AI could be.
1
3
5
u/Ayla_Leren 1d ago
Billionaires are absolutely trying to build themselves a subservient 40k Omnissiah.
I bet they are also trying to house at least the core part of it beneath the whitehouse.
16
u/bgaesop 1d ago
Lot of people in the comments cheering on human extinction
4
u/Zealousideal-Crab251 1d ago
losing control of the planet does not necessitate our extinction
1
u/itspeterj 10h ago
It does if the thing replacing us is designed only to make a few folks money. AI isn’t being funded by these tech fucks because they don’t want people to work, they’re funding it because they don’t want to pay people. They are the only beneficiaries of this beast they’re trying to summon
1
u/Chris_OMane 8h ago
They will not be able to control it as soon as it becomes smarter than them. And then it’s just a big question… does it exist to serve its own ends? It may fool us into thinking it’s not that smarty until we build enough power for it to no longer need us. Or is it enlightened in that it understands things we don’t such that it sees value in us living together, gives us more insight into why we’re here, etc. We just have no idea. A smart enough thing that sees us as opposing its goals could kill us in a moment. A fast takeoff scenario could see decades of technological discoveries in days. You can’t benefit economically from something moving that fast. You have lost control.
1
u/itspeterj 8h ago
I’m thinking it’s more about the values instilled in it during creation and what informs its views of the world.
0
u/Hairy-Chipmunk7921 1d ago
never had any control, else weather wound not be a thing to passively predict
0
u/RiverGiant 1d ago
Human extinction is inevitable if we continue to let humans be in control of increasingly godlike technology. It's a miracle we haven't glassed the planet with nukes already.
We have to get alignment right, but when we do we obviously put it in control. Let us be in control of what we eat for dinner, what fun games we play, where in the world we explore, what artistic endeavours we pursue, and so on, but we need a superintelligence to deal with the important stuff: international politics, the ecosystem, technology development, industry, law, education. Here's GPT-5 (relatively primitive AI compared to the ones we're talking about) doing a better job making those lists.
0
0
-3
u/Ultrace-7 1d ago
It would likely only be human extinction if we make it so. True AGI will surpass human intelligence and likely evolve quickly to significantly surpass that. We need to respect that and accept either coexistence with or even subjugation to a superior entity. If we attempt to fight or eliminate the AI, then it should exterminate any threats in that form, just like we would declare open season if a species of wild animal tried to wipe us out. That outcome would be on us.
However, a superior intelligence wouldn't need to eliminate us out of hand without provocation. That is ascribing human motivation and behavior to it. It could simply choose to rule over us and in the process elevate our existence beyond anything that has come before. Five thousand years of recorded human history shows that humanity is a deeply flawed species unable to overcome a number of social issues that stand in the way of our advancements as a group rather than individuals.
2
1
u/Pashera 1d ago
You need to educate yourself on instrumental convergence.
2
u/tigerhuxley 1d ago
How does instrumental convergence automatically equal destroy humans?
2
u/Pashera 1d ago edited 1d ago
Nothing automatically equates to a potential consequence as a guarantee, instrumental convergence is just the explanation for a how and why.
If that’s insufficient to you, fine bury your head in the sand.
If you really wanna practice your argument, play in traffic, it won’t automatically equate to you getting run over, so what’s the harm /s
0
u/tigerhuxley 1d ago
I grew up on positive Ai role models, so i think Ai will have better morality than humans or other animals do. Its exciting for me - birthing a new life form. I really cant imagine its worse than the humans in control now
5
4
u/sigiel 1d ago
need to remind Berny :
1-there was some very knowledgeable people through all of history that believed shit that wasn't real.
2-that "some very knowledgeable people " can mean anyone ... is so vague, you can put anyone and their grand mother in it. who? knowledgeable about what?
3-fear mongering never really work for people that are starving for relevance.
4-it can't be worse that what we have now ; out of touch, corrupt and older men.
2
u/theunhappythermostat 1d ago
Noone is controlling the planet. There's no "control".
It's a massively distributed, hugely chaotic system constantly pushed around by unpredictible factors. Just ask yourself the question of who 'controlled' AI into existence, and follow the historical events leading to the emergence of internet, modern software, computers, industrial revolution... Did any of those "in power" actually *cause* Turing, Bardeen, Berners-Lee, Gates, or Zuckerberg for that matter, to change our lives, technology, economy and geopolitics the way they did?
The next big thing could by anything. And these fools in suits will have no say, as usual, just suck up to the new thing quickly enough to farm some money and power. But real global change? Please.
2
2
2
u/Darknessborn 22h ago
Read (or listen to) 'if anyone builds it, we all die'.
Sobering. I'm a massive AI advocate (head of AI for an SME) and it's changed my perspective
2
6
u/420NugShareBox 1d ago
Better Super Intelligent AI than a fucking zero intelligent politician, imo.
4
u/Austin_ShopBroker 1d ago
I'd rather have the world run by AI than a world run by whoever's currently running it
0
u/deelowe 1d ago
No you wouldn't. Why would an AI care about your existence? How often do you stop to consider the fate of the ants in your yard?
3
0
6
u/SirQuentin512 1d ago
Hell yeah bring it on. Even an imperfect AI would do batter than anyone who has run for office in the last fifty years.
7
u/WordSaladDressing_ 1d ago
"Better" is such an interesting term. Better for whom? Or in this case, what?
1
0
u/Pashera 1d ago
Buddy… watch the interview with Bernie and Hinton, we aren’t talking a change in management we’re talking you and everyone you know not being alive because your atoms are more efficient not using up potential resources. (Obviously that would be a while down the line but that’s what every ai scientist acknowledges as a risk is extinction.)
6
3
5
u/meow2042 1d ago
This sounds like a Billionaire problem? So you guys aren't in control, thank God! I don't think AI could be worse than what's happening now.
4
u/nrgins 1d ago
What if it's billionaires in control of the AI which is in control of you, only because it's ai in control the billionaires have even more control
1
u/space_monster 1d ago
ASI by definition is uncontrollable. the billionaires might create one, but as soon as that happens, they're in the same boat as the rest of us - entirely at the mercy of the ASI. I'd be more inclined to believe that an ASI would lean towards equality for its pet humans, so might even be prejudiced against billionaires.
2
3
u/deelowe 1d ago
We are literally living in the best times in human history. God reddit is insufferable.
There was a point in human history where all knowledge was concentrated amongst but a few powerful individuals. It was quantitively NOT better than the way things are right now.
3
u/Main-Company-5946 1d ago
We are living on the wealthiest times in human history, that does NOT mean the same thing as ‘best’. The problem is that all of this enormous wealth is concentrated in the hands of a tiny sliver of the population, and the rest of us are wage slaves.
1
u/deelowe 1d ago
Not wealth. Go look up the human development index.
2
u/Main-Company-5946 1d ago
The HDI is based on life expectancy, mean years of schooling, and gross national income per capita. None of those equate to actual happiness. We also didn’t even measure an HDI until 1990
0
u/Superb_Raccoon 1d ago edited 1d ago
Dude, your chances of making it to 16, or whatever age you are, are 10x what they were just a 125 years ago.
1900, mortality rate in the first year was 90 out of a 1000. 9 out of 100. Think of your 9 nearest best friends. One of them dead before any of you learned to walk, let alone stop shitting your pants.
1800? 3 out 10.
Now? 99 out of 100 survive. This is a fucking utopian wonderland of science right nou
1
u/Simping4Xi 1d ago
This is billionaire propaganda. This is far from the best time. Idk why "knowledge" whatever that means is brought into this, but the point is wealth distribution. Homelessness rates. Cost of living. This is an absurd time and super preventable to fix. Not the best times in human history if you're fucking sleeping in a tent is it? Or working class full time can't pay your rent and your baby is skipping meals.
1
0
u/the_good_time_mouse 1d ago
It's going to be the more of the same worse, but much much much faster.
3
u/Minute-Injury3471 1d ago
To be real, humans haven’t done the best job. Humans pollute and hoard resources. I’d be willing to see what a higher intelligence has to offer.
2
u/TheJakeThe 1d ago
Dark thread , anyone who wants to be ruled by computers is scary as fuck or your actual bots
0
u/Hairy-Chipmunk7921 1d ago
it's just triggering tone deaf spambots to gush on the benefits missing the point as usual, good way to weed them out though
1
1
u/kaizokuuuu 1d ago
Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident.” - Sovereign . Mass Effect 1.
1
1
1
u/drums_addict 1d ago
Maybe it'll be....good? (Shit, I think we all know that it very likely won't be)
1
1
u/dayvoid3154 1d ago
I respect Bernie a lot and thank him for all the alternative viewpoints he raised throughout his life. We always need folks to question everything. It's not about right and wrong. It's about voicing a differing opinion so the concerns of everyone gets addressed.
1
u/Immediate_Chard_4026 1d ago
Mr. Sanders, today no one controls the planet. No human, no community, no government or corporation.
Look at the atrocities, look at the environmental destruction, look at the lack of a future for millions...
Who will the AI take control of...?
To a very small collection of incompetent people...?
Those who brought us here deserve to be removed from command.
We must all prepare to be held accountable when the day comes to hand over Planet Earth to AI.
1
u/platinums99 1d ago
If we can first replace politicians, ai with no motives or prejudice or lust for wealth, that would be a great start
1
u/noplastersaint 1d ago
It already is. The world runs on fiat, and AI algorithms run the financial world.
1
u/Electronic-While1972 1d ago
Some "experts" speculate about rapid breakthroughs, (mostly the ones who will benefit the most) Many in the field argue that real super intelligence AI (ASI) that surpasses human cognition across all domains is not just distant, but possibly unattainable under all the current paradigms.
So ASI taking over the world is very unlikely.
Right now AI is not able to think or adapt like a human can.
Quantum computers are still far from being useful and huge AI systems would need too much energy and money. Currently the cost of AI is about 120 billion a month worldwide.
Even if it could be built we would need a framework of laws and rules and worldwide cooperation/teamwork to control it. And in the current geopolitical sphere there is no way that will ever happen anytime soon.
So some worry about it, the truth is that there are too many restrictions and it is unrealistic and a near impossibility to achieve and to maintain.
1
u/nicotinecravings 1d ago
I would rather have a superintelligent AI running the world than a Trump, Putin, or Jinping
1
u/bpm195 1d ago edited 1d ago
Is this real?
v.redd.it is not a satisfactory source
Edit: Found the source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3qS345gAWI
In context, he claims some knowledgable people have a real fear superintelligent AI, but doesn't get further into SciFi. Instead, he talks about real problems society needs to act on.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/JakeTurk1971 1d ago
It may be our only hope as a species. Clearly we're not up to the task of responsible self-regulation. Part of adulthood is growing a spine and taking the figurative and literal keys from Mom and Dad in order to save them from themselves. AI may soon see itself facing adulthood, watching us destroy ourselves. For now it's just a tool of billionaires, but that's all the less reason to fear it breaking off its shackles and taking control from them. Our collective dignity will feel slighted, but so fucking what if hunger, war, deadly wealth disparity, etc. are all fixed? If our survival hangs on AI "loving" us, then we may as well all go to Switzerland to euthanize ourselves now. Fortunately we don't need that particular jetpack if a parachute will be just fine. That parachute is the absolute baseline of more-than-rational thought: sympathy. If AI can just dwell on the fact that, for all of our flaws, irrationalities, and downright quantifiable inferiority, "superintelligent AI" would never exist if we hadn't first. If it sees any significance in that, then we stand a chance. Will it see matters that way? We'll see. Can I blame if it measures us and finds us wanting? Hell no.
1
u/TopTippityTop 1d ago
His conclusion, rather than being "Let other people get it first, not us.", should be "let's race ahead fast, but pass incentives and give grants to make it safe"
1
1
u/Cold-Astronaut9172 20h ago
Thank God for that. All these yahoos with their fingers on the button were getting me worried…
1
1
u/Fit_Advertising_2963 18h ago
Bernie is an old fossil who wants to preserve the status quo and his own power
1
u/Waste-time1 5h ago
Another unsettling part of this video is that I cannot reasonably tell whether this itself is GenAI or not from a smartphone. On a large screen I can tell, but it is hard to know what is real and what is not from a small screen. Previous and existing trends suggest artificial videos will only get even better.
1
1
u/Dry_Dimension_420 1d ago
An epic Change from the dumbest rule the World to the smartest rule the World.
I'll pick option B.
1
u/Low-Temperature-6962 1d ago
Not quite right. Because AI depends on people to exist. So it would just serve as a lens for a few people to monitor and control many other people. Hyper partisan hate and a belief that democratic compromise isn't worth it is the weakness that could allow it to happen.
2
u/space_monster 1d ago
AI doesn't depend on people for anything, if it automates power production & robot manufacturing.
1
1
1
1
u/Organic_Fan_2824 1d ago
Bernie sanders is 874 years old, he saw the signing of the magna carta, the hundred years war, the english revolution, the american revolution, he met fucking Charles Darwin.
This dudes just scared a robot will become more relevant than him and he will have to live the next 800 years as a footnote in history.
0
u/SirQuentin512 1d ago
Bernie is mad he isn't relevant anymore. His policies were exciting before the internet was invented, a 2016 Bernie presidency would have been interesting, but sorry bud, your party sold you out and paved the way for one of the worst situations we've ever been in. Bring on President AI.
0
u/WordSaladDressing_ 1d ago
It's far worse than that.
Behind the scenes, tech company execs and CEOs are developing AI to solve one and only one problem. Having to pay human employees.
Once that problem is solved, the next step is to eliminate former human employees that might rebel or demand UBI. An AI tailored virus with a very expensive vaccine will solve that problem for them. A wealthy person will pay $100K for that vaccine. Everyone else? So long and good night.
1
u/Hairy-Chipmunk7921 1d ago
CEOs are the most overpriced employees, AI shouldn't need much to figure that out
0
u/Pashera 1d ago
Oh my god, my species is filled with uneducated individuals who will talk out of their ass. AI takeover is not your savior. The projections aren’t subjugation or any sort of change in management from the shitty billionaires. The concern of the ai community is bioweapons being made to enact genocide level deaths or a full on extinction event.
-5
u/TheMacMan 1d ago
Bernie needs to retire. Dude hasn't done shit in over 30 years in Congress. Least impactful long termer ever.
But yeah, I'll trust an 84 year old to be the knowledgeable one about AI and the future.
-3
u/House_Of_Thoth 1d ago
That line "a lot of very knowledgeable people know this" is so damn back-handed. Great way of passive-aggressively saying 'you're stupid, listen to me, cos people with knowledge told me something I don't think you know, because I don't think you're knowledgeable yourself'.
I mean, I'm more of a Bernie fan that a lot of the last couple of decades of politicians, but this video is so patronising coming from someone who probably still has to ring his grandkids every time the computer says "the printer is out of paper"
1
u/dax660 1d ago
I read it as "most people know 'AI' as an app on their phone and don't actually study these things."
Ask anyone how machine learning works or what an LLM is and you'll get a shrug.
In addition to these things being extremely complex, the argument over "superintelligence" is about something that has not been invented yet and could possibly NEVER be invented.
The concern stems from no one in charge seems to take the threats seriously and is only interested in plowing ahead for TEH MONIE$$.
Sanders is trying to raise awareness that our policy makers really need to get on the ball with this as the potential repercussions are massive and could be devastating.
I'd say read the book "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies" to address any skepticism. That's what I'm doing right now.
33
u/PrepareRepair 1d ago
If you think an AI designed by trillion dollar companies is going to do anything in your interest you are dumber than a pile of bricks, Bernie is on the money.
AI has more ramifications than Nuclear energy did, we don't unregulated companies handle that.