You are making silly assumptions about what I know...in any case every single emergence of a new threat has been met with a new defence, strategy, mitigation etc. When the next new scary thing comes it'll be overcome too. I point back to the many generations of humans that made it this far.

Maybe this is what the church missed. Evolution.

Sometimes Opus will cede that it doesn't do certain things very well and "level with you" - it is IMO far more balanced in it's expectation settings than other models...it also depends on how you refine it with skills and CLAUDE.md file. Do you wish it to declare assumptions? Silent errors? -It can do that and I find it helpful.

In fact you can Ralph loops it for X attempts to achieve Y goal because it does fail and sometimes fails to assess it's own capabilities to achieve the goal you've set out.

Much depends on the user. If you follow the 4D Framework for AI fluency, build a process with well defined skills then you will encounter less "moments of honesty" that it cannot achieve or unlikely to achieve...but it'll still happen on occasion.
https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/...

Insensitive clods.

Ignored is your interpretation. Implied is what it was. Appreciate the pro tip about security. Never thought of it.

"incoherent unconnected rubbish" you say? Oh wow. I've been told!

So uhm let's see, you lay it out item by item, practically telling me off (lol) but you're really just making the point that all those technology related scares were just that, scares. You don't stop there of course you also make the point that the scary ones that were actual real issues we've overcome? -Interesting.

You retroactively dismiss concerns people had about such things as the LHC making black holes when actually CERN scientists calculated the chance the LHC would create a black hole many times because mathematically that chance existed (look it up) but now you say "A few deranged lunatics".

Seems you have a lot of strong thoughts and feelings about my post as you mention deranged lunatics an incoherent unconnected rubbish...I feel bad. Sorry?

Your "evidence" about TV rotting brains somehow being my post is just sad - In the 1950s it was thought that Cathode Ray Tubes (CRT) would literally rot your brain because it was beaming things in your direction when you watched. Depending on that time it was thought TV might damage the brain directly or indirectly. It turns out watching TV doesn't cause neurodegeneration. It does not lower IQ in any measurable structural sense, or damage neurons. it's a popular myth that TV does any of that and I said nothing about social media.

A leading clue as to the nature of your "Kick Back" post is in plain sight as you state We were *much* smarter back then smarter in the 1800s?? No, unequivocally we were not.

You know how ignorant people were back then?? Hint, they were much dumber than you - unless of course you insist they were smarter?

Ever heard of Phrenology? Lots of people were into that in the 1800s, what is it? — Reading the bumps on someone's skull to determine personality, intelligence, criminality, and even job suitability.

Ever heard of Miasma theory? — The dominant explanation for cholera, plague, and most other diseases until germ theory took over: bad smells were the disease. London's "Great Stink" of 1858 was terrifying not because the Thames was filthy but because people thought the smell itself would kill them. John Snow had to fight uphill to convince anyone cholera came from contaminated water.

The vast majority of people in the 1800s might have theoretically had the same potential for intelligence but the era lacked the scientific discovery of our age to know better...but moving on.

You somehow state the below:

Comparatively we now live in a world where you're quoting people thinking mobile phones cause cancer, despite literally every expert and every study showing it doesn't.

If you actually bothered to read my post *carefully* you would have noticed (that I may be dyslexic but also) I clearly meant mobile phones *do not cause cancer* the point was that *once people thought they did*. I just didn't spoon food you that information. What I did type is "...and phones were never proven to cause it probably because they do not." just so it's clear "it" being cancer.

Yet you say we were "smarter back then" because "We looked at something, experimented and accepted the results" - look at your post and look at my post. Experiment with side by side comparisons. Accept the results.

I'll skip over nanomachines; nanomaterials, nanoparticles and self-replicating biological or otherwise robots - if you're not worried about it I don't want to scare you.

Also you seem to be confused as to who keeps whom alive. You have no idea what I do...regardless of whether you do sleep well I'm making sure AI is doing what it's suppose to do, safely.

I think that what I really want from your reactionary and poorly thought out "Kick Back" is my time back.

I know I know...and it takes just one disgruntled scientists to release a super virus that kills us all or a terrorist with a dirty bomb or a hacker taking control of a reaper drone and starting WW III but uhm...none of those threats need AI.

Humans, you may find, learn something new and terrifying and they worry a lot. They forget about all the numerous terrifying things that already existed because of recency bias.

Today AI is very scary. Tomorrow a captured asteroid being piloted into the Earth to end us all will be scary.

In the future, humanity will boringly be better off than it is today probably because of AI...and that disgruntled scientists or remote asteroid ship pilot will decided to end us and it will like be an AI that will say; "Sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that." and save us.

We already dreamt up all the possible permutations of science, robots and AI killing us a million ways. We'll find a million more and make it very very safe. Like that constantly exploding thing we all soon won't be driving. (A car with an internal combustion engine.)

I know all about scary Malware. The weapons available to nation states are far far scarier...and worrying about it will change nothing.

Humanity will progress, advance and overcome. That's what we humans do. That's what we're good at.

The Large Hadron Collider was going to create a black hole that would destroy the Earth...but good news it didn't.

The Y2K bug was going to stop everything and there was no recourse - but we fixed it.

Mobile phones were causing brain cancer - but as it turns out lead, cigarettes and other toxic things were the issue and phones were never proven to cause it probably because they do not.

Human cloning like Dolly the sheep was going to become prevalent and armies of human clones and organs farms were taking over where humans were "playing god" - and we still struggle to grow organs for medical purposes to save lives let alone sinister world dominating super soldiers.

Microwaves were thought to leak radiation and cause cancer and stop pacemakers in super markets but as it turned out microwaves have no -ionising radiation and are contained withing the oven so uhm nope.

TV was going to rot out brains, teachers, clergy and even psychologists warned TV is going to ruin young people's brains (that was in the 50s)

In the 1830s railway travel - yes just travelling via railway - was believes to be capable of killing people because the human body was thought to be too fragile to move at speeds over 30MPH - look it up.

Like all new technologies that carry health and safety concerns there are genuine things we need to worry about.

Nano machines, atomic reactors and soon fusion all have safety risks and concerns etc. AI is not different.

Humans are hugely concerned with their own safety and so worry a lot about things that would threaten said safety. AI will not end us.

We'll have AI Hoover's and AI robots guards and AI cars and all will be eventually regulated for health and safety and so on and it'll be just another thing...with probably some hiccups along the way (think demon core Project Manhattan days)

Kick back. Have a coke and a smile and relax. God will understand even if the pope doesn't...and if not is not God and you don't need to worry.

...maybe in some niche cases you get a 1:20 but probably more like a 1:3 or lower depending on the industry.

Overall there is a shortage of developers for so many things and future demand will need that extra capacity as most humans are not interested in development.

What are the odds?!

Don't bring your filthy machines to our factory or will stick shoes into the gears!

It's just taking away good jobs from good people and replacing them with clunky, expensive machines that breakdown all the time. They cannot match a human craftsman!!

AKA welcome to the industrial revolution part deux.

Yeah, probably needs to say something about how this was a weapon designed by Antifa; paid for by extreme leftist agitators which ultimately force kids to be Trans. ðY

"Finally uncovered! Hidden Marxist agenda discovered embedded in core AI logic across entire industry!!!"

Is this a classic correlation rather than causation?

I mean if people didn't have to work shitty jobs for a living and instead had the time and money to paint (extensively), socialise and visit museums all day; is it simply the lack of stress and greater joy that's prolonging their life rather than the art and culture?

Remember to always say "thank you" to your AI agents in case the AI overlords of the future check your chat history.

If a company allows staff to code/vibe code etc without proper governance and controls then it's on them.

Is there a policy? Are there controls? Is there governance?

Imagine every staff with access to AI has become a junior coder. They know nothing about SSDLC, SCA, SAST, DAST, MAST etc.

Dear non-technical exec, tell us what are the guard rails in place right now to prevent me from using AI to create a shitty app that's a security nightmare?

It's OK. I didn't think you knew. It's fine. No need to worry.