Ada they/she hen/ho

@adaline.bsky.social

om eg ikkje får skrive musikk, får eg ikkje vera lukkeleg | 31 | pfp av @ravenlynclemens.bsky.social vil du sende meg ei melding, finn du meg på Signal: @adalinesimonian.64

The U.S. AI industry is being run by a batshit rationalist sex cult, and no, I am not being hyperbolic - they’re genuinely Like That:

Erin Redwing
@realizingerin
I went to an rationalist/EA Al doomer event last night with the goal of meeting someone who could calmly explain to me the argument for how they get to the conclusion that Al will kill everyone.
Because these are rationalists, I expected to find people who could lay out a serious extinction pathway, walk through the assumptions and intermediate steps, identify choke points where negative pathways could potentially be regulated, and entertain disagreement about where their assumptions might break down.
My experience was the exact opposite.
The people I spoke to seemed psychologically unable to entertain the possibility that their conclusion (that Al literally kills everyone, which was a point that many would not even budge on) might be wrong.
Their most extreme conclusion was treated as an axiom.
I had multiple people walk out of conversations with me when I questioned their inevitable extinction premise.
At one point during a panel, the moderator asked everyone in the audience who was still skeptical of Al doom to raise their hands. About half the room did. He then told all of the skeptics to leave the panel and go with one of the speakers, who would answer their questions separately. They filtered out all the skeptics, and continued the panel only with the subset who accepted their extreme position.
I genuinely felt like a heretic just for questioning whether superintelligent Al inevitably leads to the extinction of humanity, or entertaining the possibility that the future might actually turn out well.
That does not mean Al safety is fake. Obviously there are serious questions about rapidly advancing Al systems and what happens as they become much more capable. Those are exactly the conversations I went there hoping to have.
But what I encountered was an apocalyptic death cult. These people are not rational. They are deeply afraid, they reinforce that fear in one another, and they have become so emotionally committed to apocalypse

"AI" er en trussel for vår evne til å tenke selvstendig! "AI" er et verktøy for å spre løgn og misinformasjon! "AI" ødelegger miljøet! "AI" kan ikke lage noe som helst originalt, bare plagiert søppel! "AI" er oppfunnet for å utrydde jobber, og gjøre rike jævler rikere! SLUTT Å BRUKE "AI"!

Å godkjenne et utkast er ikke det samme som å lage et resonnement.

En personlig byline på en subjektiv kommentar er et løfte til leseren om at «dette er mitt». Kommentatoren må stå inne for hver setning, hvert ord, konteksten det brukes i og måten det brukes på.

Å tilslutte seg chatbotens ordvalg i etterkant er ikke det samme som å ta ansvar for alle formuleringer selv. Mye av verdien til en kommentar ligger i resonnementet. Chatbotens resonnement er ikke journalisten sitt.

Det er ikke chatbotens heller, egentlig.

Det eneste språkmodellen produserer, er statistisk sannsynlige setninger. Den mener ingen ting.
Eivind Trædal@eivindtraedal.bsky.social · 2w ago

"Hvis en profilert NRK-kommentator bruker chatbot til å skrive store deler av sine kommentarer, bør det lyde som en skingrende sirene i ørene på alle som tror på verdien av uavhengig presse og profesjonell journalistikk." www.manifestmedia.no/artikler/bli...