[nigamanth]

One question for the tech experts, of course people can use AI and technology for bad and illegal activities, but isn't that the case about everything?

The person who invented the car didn't think about people using it to smuggle drugs or trample other people on purpose, and the wright brothers didn't think about all the people who would die due to plane crashes.

So instead of focusing on the bad that's happening with AI, can't we just look at all the people he has helped with his work on AI?

[codingdave]

I think you are inadvertently making the point that yes, we should be wary: What if, in the early days of cars and planes, people could have foreseen the worst of the problems that would come of those inventions, and slowed down to think through those problems, evaluate the risks, and find ways to mitigate them?

What if we now lived in a world that still had effective transportation, but without lost lives from crashes, without pollution, and without a climate crisis? Would that not be a good thing? Would that not have been worth slowing down even if it took as much as a couple decades?

So maybe it is worth listening to the risks of AI and taking the time now to prevent problems in the future.

[IIAOPSW]

The information age was inaugurated with a single question, a revolutionary act, like the starting pistol aimed at Ferdinand, or Martin Luther nailing his thesis to the door. The answer to this first question still unfolds. Very early on everything was known except for what it implied. Wholly modern concepts like unprinted characters and substitution compression were discovered in those first few years. The inventors of the these early devices could not foresee the centuries ahead of them, but they understood full well just how profoundly they had just changed the course of human civilization. The question was .-- .... .- - / .... .- ... / --. --- -.. / .-- .-. --- ..- --. .... - ..--..

I was talking about the telegraph this whole time.

Its not about bad people using the AI. The AI is potentially an agent in the discussion as well, and we don't yet know to what extent and what that entails. We know everything except the implications of what we are doing.

[rg111]

Quantity is a quality in itself.

In most countries, guns are very strictly controlled. Knives are not. Yet you can kill people with knives as people do.

AI technology is extremely powerful and it can and does enable malicious activities at scale. Scale, previously unthinkable.

As a Research Engineer working in AI (no relation to LLM or AGI), I think that sentient AGI/skynet has a very low, non-zero chance of becoming reality.

But with the AI tech we have today, massive harm can be caused at scale.

The world is far from ready for what bad actors will bring forth enable with the power of AI.

[notRobot]

Yes, let's just ignore the people losing jobs and falling victim to AI-generated large-scale disinformation!

Yes there has been good done. But we need to focus on the bad, so we can figure out how to make it less bad.

[ilc]

We don't need AI to fall victim to those things. Disinformation is already a major problem. And the spread between the rich and poor, and the leverage their jobs produce... is larger than ever.

Right or wrong. AI is merely another thing that shifts the balance a bit. I'm not even sold as far as far as many say.