Bernie: "We Should Ban Artificial Intelligence"

@sonhouse said
So where did you all of a sudden get a fking PHD in cyberwarfare?

I do not. I have common sense. Don't you?

Hey, I have an idea. Let's connect a nuclear weapon to the internet when it only takes one to start a nuclear war. All to make things more convenient for us. Good idea?

@Metal-Brain said
Your problem is not with AI. Your problem is with bad actors. AI is just a tool. All tools can be used for good or bad. Screwdrivers have been used to kill people. Do you want to ban screwdrivers?

Banning a powerful tool like AI is impossible. Banning any technology is pretty much insane. Don't be a Ted Kaczynski. Try getting nuclear weapons banned. See how it goes. Wr ...[text shortened]... e up our nuclear weapons to set a good example for Iran. I'm sure he would get a good laugh from it.

You keep writing that AI is a powerful tool. Obviously, it's more powerful than a screwdriver, and its power is growing every day. A regular bomb compared to a nuclear bomb. There are many examples of AI being asked to do things but they AI solves the problem by ignoring the rules of engagement. As AI grows more and more powerful, there is legitimate concern that it will start doing things agnostic to human interest in order to solve problems. Think of a real estate developer who is building a skyscraper on top of an anthill. We don't want to kill the ants, we just don't care about them. That is the danger of AI.

@Metal-Brain said
I do not. I have common sense. Don't you?

Hey, I have an idea. Let's connect a nuclear weapon to the internet when it only takes one to start a nuclear war. All to make things more convenient for us. Good idea?

Putting everything in a bunker to protect it from the inevitability of AI taking over all things not bunkered does not seem like a good solution.

It's illegal to hold humanity hostage in this way. Let's not wait for the mass-extinction event occur before we take some action to prevent it from happening.

@AverageJoe1 said
I do think that “who do we trust?” is exactly the right question for sure, but I don’t think the answer is “whoever is shouting the loudest.” Think that 27 year old. Who the hel is he.
People inside the industry warning about AI deserve to be heard, just as people developing it shouldn’t automatically be trusted simply because they have billions invested. But neither wa ...[text shortened]... ies like Netherlands (🥴🫩🫩😳😁🥴🙂)will get in a room and decide yeah we can’t let this get away from us?

Are you saying that 27 year olds aren't capable of reasoned, rational thought? And who do you think is 'shouting the loudest' ? 'People inside the industry' are not the same as the people investing in the industry; in terms of potential dangers, the investors should be ignored, because.....They are the ones who stand to lose if the industry fails, or is more carefully monitored, and stand to gain if it continues unabated, can you understand that?

Asking what specific danger we are predicting is the correct question to ask, and do you know the answer? I don't, and that is my point, we should be told, so that we are better able to know who is telling the truth and who is pulling the wool, so to speak.

Whatever 'progress' (by golly) you think AI engenders, to look at any positive aspects whilst ignoring the negative aspects (which surely do exist) is just plain stupid; this is not redesigning buses, this is world - changing technology, and should be fully understood from all perspectives.

As for 'do I really think' that there will be international consensus, if you read my previous posts on the subject, and concentrate really hard, you will know how how I stand on that.

@Metal-Brain said
My theory is that the big AI companies want regulation to make it harder for smaller competitors to catch up to them and compete on a level playing field so to speak. That would explain why the big AI CEOs are complaining about AI being a threat when they caused programmed an AI with self preservation and caused the very problem they complained about.

Notice there are ...[text shortened]... ion everyone should ask. "AI doesn't have a body. How can it kill someone without help from people?"

Ay, well, conspiracy theories will abound, of course, and you may well be right. As to how AI can kill someone, it perhaps can't, without human influence, but we hear say of systems developing themselves and overriding human instruction, which is a bit worrying in itself.

In any case, even if we trust the technology, the other question is, how much do we trust humans not to abuse it? We may all be nice and friendly to one another, but historically cooperation and consideration for others has not been our strong point.

@Metal-Brain said
You are so full of it. If you have a child with a condition that is known to "trigger" autism when vaccinated do you vaccinate that child? Of course not, because you know that will "cause" autism!

You are repeating word games like a parrot. And you don't want to admit even to yourself that you are defending a contradiction simply because you want to believe contradicto ...[text shortened]... one person asking them "can't you just unplug your stuff from the internet if it becomes a problem?"

I would LOVE to see your face when it is half burned off while you are dying in a nuclear fury, would you even have time to say, OOPS, so sorry I was wrong?

@Metal-Brain said
LOL!
And who is going to build these robots for AI?
AI is a human problem. You are not in fear of AI. You are in fear of what humans will do with AI. AI can only go rogue if it is programmed to.

I guess you really ARE stuck in century 20 or maybe 19. Some developments are WAY too dangerous, and sure we like to uses Gemini to help with real hard troubleshooting problems on the MRC 603 sputtering tool, an ancient 40 year old vintage piece of gear I have to keep running and Gemini helps a lot for instance with finding data sheets on a diode we don't know the specs or if it was a zener, what voltage and wattage is it, Gemini looks that kind of stuff up instantly and it would take a much longer time for me to suss out where that data lives. And much more but that is the good side of AI, there are already examples of AI literally breaking into the bosses office to try to steal information to solve some problem given to it by humans and several AI's got together and LITERALLY one sacrificed itself to get the rest into the bosses computer.
But of course since Trump said all this criticism of AI is FAKE NEWS, and Mike Johnson goes, just let the AI companies do that job, we don't need to regulate them. BULLCRAP if they are given an inch they will take over the whole fking PLANET, the Silicon Valley experts say those guys are called Nerd Reich and there is actually a book written about their ambitions which in fact includes them doing everything in their power to kill democracy and install Trump as dictator so we can join the rest of the real world of dictators, China gets THIS much land, Russia gets Europe, US gets North, Middle and South America and Greenland in the bargain and Cuba of course. That is not the mainstream AI workers, these dudes are NUTS with power since they literally are all billionaires in their Nerd Reich cabal.
Try something totally unique for you, GOOGLE Nerd Reich and see what pops up.

@Metal-Brain said
I do not. I have common sense. Don't you?

Hey, I have an idea. Let's connect a nuclear weapon to the internet when it only takes one to start a nuclear war. All to make things more convenient for us. Good idea?

You are a FOOL of the lowest order. You read some right wing propaganda and you think you have the answer to all the worlds problems, who the FK cares if USAID was KILLED, it was just for financial reasons, it had NOTHING to do with the FACT JACK that ELON MUSK HATED USAID from the time he was a teenager because he LOVED apartheid because he was already a white privileged kid and USAID helped just by saving lives with ZERO politics, Musk HATED that and that was one HIGH on his bucket list to kill, now on a South African TV interview he was asked how many children died from ending USAID, he said several times ZERO, NONE, repeated several times. And the budget was less than a percent of our GDP so don't EVEN invoke TOO EXPENSIVE. What it REALLY did was to sour relations of good will all over the world and now the child death count is running its way to a MILLION children dead because WE were so FKING SINISTER, we killed USAID and there was LITERALLY tons of the peanut cake thing those kids got to just keep them from starving WAITING on the docks, and had to be destroyed for lack of transport for tons ALREADY PAID FOR.

Nice work those TWO FKING TRAITORS, MUSK and YOUR personal savior Trump.

@sonhouse said
I guess you really ARE stuck in century 20 or maybe 19. Some developments are WAY too dangerous, and sure we like to uses Gemini to help with real hard troubleshooting problems on the MRC 603 sputtering tool, an ancient 40 year old vintage piece of gear I have to keep running and Gemini helps a lot for instance with finding data sheets on a diode we don't know the specs or i ...[text shortened]... ir Nerd Reich cabal.
Try something totally unique for you, GOOGLE Nerd Reich and see what pops up.

You wrote a lot for explaining nothing.
You have no idea why AI is dangerous. The corporate news media just told you to panic and you went all out Pavlov. You know next to nothing about it.

@sonhouse said
You are a FOOL of the lowest order. You read some right wing propaganda and you think you have the answer to all the worlds problems, who the FK cares if USAID was KILLED, it was just for financial reasons, it had NOTHING to do with the FACT JACK that ELON MUSK HATED USAID from the time he was a teenager because he LOVED apartheid because he was already a white privileged ki ...[text shortened]... r tons ALREADY PAID FOR.

Nice work those TWO FKING TRAITORS, MUSK and YOUR personal savior Trump.

I am a socialist, not a republican. Let me know when you get a grip on reality.
Tell me, who in the big AI corporation programed an AI to prioritize self preservation above all else?

And what does this prove? That the programmers at Anthropic are stupid?
What do you think Isaac Asimov would say about programming the 3rd law of robotics without the first 2? Probably "don't do that dumbass!".

@Metal-Brain said
I am a socialist, not a republican. Let me know when you get a grip on reality.
Tell me, who in the big AI corporation programed an AI to prioritize self preservation above all else?

And what does this prove? That the programmers at Anthropic are stupid?
What do you think Isaac Asimov would say about programming the 3rd law of robotics without the first 2? Probably "don't do that dumbass!".

A socialist defending Trump every time you open your mouth.,

@Metal-Brain said
I am a socialist, not a republican. Let me know when you get a grip on reality.
Tell me, who in the big AI corporation programed an AI to prioritize self preservation above all else?

And what does this prove? That the programmers at Anthropic are stupid?
What do you think Isaac Asimov would say about programming the 3rd law of robotics without the first 2? Probably "don't do that dumbass!".

It would go "call me DUMBASS?" then the dude finds out his bank account has been emptied just for spite.

@Indonesia-Phil said
Ay, well, conspiracy theories will abound, of course, and you may well be right. As to how AI can kill someone, it perhaps can't, without human influence, but we hear say of systems developing themselves and overriding human instruction, which is a bit worrying in itself.

In any case, even if we trust the technology, the other question is, how much do we trust human ...[text shortened]... ne another, but historically cooperation and consideration for others has not been our strong point.

"but we hear say of systems developing themselves and overriding human instruction"

We hear it , but it doesn't make much sense and nobody is proving these weak claims. It was reported that AI tried to blackmail people, but when I read the article they said it was because they told AI it was going to be shut down. AI does not have any desire for self preservation unless some idiot programmed it to have one.

The big AI CEOs are not telling us everything. And nobody is asking them how AI can want to survive without them programming it to prioritize self preservation. And if priorities matter a lot why isn't anybody programming AI to have priorities?

@sonhouse said
It would go "call me DUMBASS?" then the dude finds out his bank account has been emptied just for spite.

The solution is simple. Program the AI not to do unethical things to accomplish a goal. The big 3 AI corporations cannot do that? Of course they can, but they want to scare the crap out of you so they can cripple AI start ups with expensive regulation because the elites are heavily invested in the big 3 AI corporations. This is just a big anti competitive scam.

It is not too late to stop them from getting regulation that will stifle competition which will give China and Russia an advantage in the private sector. Do yourself a favor and see this scam now before you defend the scammers forever like you did the covid vaccine scam.

@wildgrass said
Putting everything in a bunker to protect it from the inevitability of AI taking over all things not bunkered does not seem like a good solution.

It's illegal to hold humanity hostage in this way. Let's not wait for the mass-extinction event occur before we take some action to prevent it from happening.

LOL! Now you have to make up nonsense about a bunker?
As if nobody is capable of pulling plugs. LOL!!!!!!!!

These imaginary robots of yours do not exist. I am merely making the point that even if they did exist and were all connected to the internet all you would have to do is unplug them. It really would be that easy. Stop panicking on command Pavlov.

There is a reason no debates about this are allowed on the corporate news media. You would find out this is a lot of propaganda by omission.