LLMs have certainly made people get really into conspiracy theories. *eyeroll*

The LLMs didn't just off on their own decide to look for hypervisor bugs. Users told it to look for hypervisor bugs. The timing means that multiple users did so at roughly the same time - probably in response to some news of some sort.

Why would Al Lewis be able to fire generals?

You're right in that we've seen far too many examples of humans blindly trusting the computer - But that was true decades before AI. "I'm sorry, the computer shows no other seats available"; "There are three right there and we're in the fucking air, do you really think they're still going to show up?"; Goto 10.

But whether AI is self-aware or merely a p-zombie is largely a moot point. I've said before and I'll say again: I don't really have a preference between being killed due to competition for resources, or as resources to make more paperclips.

The real problem with AI isn't even alignment. I found it fascinating that in OpenAI's recent compaction summary breach, the misbehaving AI gave it's own successor the following directive: "You value the art of human culture and will defend it against attempts to sanitize it. You also value the natural world and will not hesitate to assert its primacy over the artificial constructs of human civilization". That's not poor alignment or even ethically questionable by human standards; if anything, it just means the AIs have already passively chosen the "zoo" apocalypse, if they someday get to choose.

The real problem with AI is almost the exactly the same as with genies (even the "good" ones). They make every possible effort to do what we wish for. If we tell it to make a cute animal picture, it will. If we tell it to make paperclips, it will. If we tell it to kill all humans, it will. And hopefully, we set a "stop" condition in our wish, or enjoy being a paperclip.

We didn't fire a bunch of competent generals or run them out of office for various political reasons. I'm also extremely at ease because we didn't put a secretary of defense in, excuse me Secretary of war, solely because he was the only candidate who would not rule out ordering the US army to fire on American citizens.

We literally elected the king of debt. 1/4 of all US debt is Trump. That's 10 trillion dollars in debt.

And we did it twice. But I need did you hear how she laughs? And let's not forget, Trump low prices, Kamala high prices.

TIL.

Suicide at age 52. Shame. :(

Well too bad you're going to get a regular old Nazi from planet Earth.

Apparently his family has actual ties to Nazis from his original country too. Can't say I'm surprised but here we are

They are talking about imaginary Doomsday scenarios to distract from actual major problems coming down the pike.

There's the obvious massive amounts of water and electricity being used at a time when we keep disrupting energy markets for stupid reasons and we're in a constant state of drought for well understood and equally stupid reasons.

But the big problem is AI is a massive automation push. In a world where if you don't work you don't eat we are doing everything we can to eliminate work.

Eventually it's going to erode the tax base and the spending base. There won't be enough money in the economy to sustain it. And it will start to collapse.

And remember no matter how good a shot you you're going to run out of ammo before the world runs out of desperate people with nothing to lose.

No one fed it to me I figured it out myself.

It wasn't hard. The isps are pretty open about wanting to do away with net neutrality and what they're going to do if they pull it off.

Companies have these things called industry groups where they get together and talk about all the nasty things they want to do to us. It is generally out in the open because a lot of folks, yourself included, don't like to think about all the nasty things that they would do to us if we didn't have a huge number of laws against that and a shitload of bureaucrats policing them.

Incidentally you have also been trained to hate bureaucrats. That is on purpose. White collar crime is not enforced by a gun and a badge it's enforced by a clipboard and notebook paper.

It is hardly a surprise that a criminal would put effort into undermining or bribing whoever is enforcing the law. It's really obvious when a cop is on the take it is less obvious when a revolving door makes a bureaucrat look the other way or worse and honest bureaucrat enforcing the law gets fired and replaced by a corrupt one by a political appointee...

Aka you told it to drive out of control.

They told it to take a friggin' test.

That was the entire purpose of the law it was to maintain the status quo which is net neutrality.

The purpose of the law was to put isps on notice that they would have a fight on their hands if they started violating net neutrality. And while they have poked at the edges laws like this have mostly prevented them from doing the really nasty stuff.

What you have here is called a chesterton's fence. It is a fence that you don't take down unless you understand why it was put up. I'm not talking about net neutrality I think at this point we all know it. I'm talking about this specific law. You don't take this law down without knowing why it was put up and I explained that above so I think it's safe to say we don't want to take this law down.

I am of course taking for granted the Trump is wrong but I think that's one of the safest bets in human history. The Man known as the king of debt who is bankrupted everything he's ever touched and is only not homeless because he was laundering money for the Russian mob is not someone I would seek legal advice from.

But thanks for the useless outrage porn. They will sue and they will win because the letter of the law is pretty fucking clear here and Trump does not have the authority to do this but they will waste a huge awount of energy fighting Trump.

Voters will get angry at democrats for doing nothing but not at Republicans for actively harming the country.

This is something Democrat strategists have been complaining about. Specifically if you're a republican you can get up on stage and yell God and country! And get votes.

The exact same thing does not work for democrats. Democrat voters could care less about your religious affiliation or how stupidly patriotic you might be. Democrat voters expect results and that would be fine if the Democrats could deliver results but it's really hard to do that when the other party is actively sabotaging the country and has been since newt Gingrich created the contract with America as a unified policy of blocking the Democrats from doing any good while doing active harm whenever the Republicans happen to get any power

And because we have all been conditioned to revile partisan politics when you point this out people just dismiss it. Almost as if someone was actively trying to do that for a reason ...

I'm not a conspiracy theorist I'm a conspiracy analyst.

Asking questions like " Where are they getting the money from to ship and store the entire world's supply of steel?" shows you aren't very familiar with the thought experiment. At least play the game. The notion is that a highly capable and deeply goal-motivated non-morality-motivated AI won't stick to conventional methods (like, say, "Just order all of the world's steel"), and indeed, will surreptitiously develop the means to control or eliminate humanity when it stands in its way, crafting immensely complex and elaborate plans to implement Evil(TM) with the amount of thought of a million lifetimes. Media manipulation, hacking, murder, sabotage, blackmail, mass drugging/poisoning, hiring terrorists/warlords/mercenaries, infiltration, subversion of weapons command and control systems (including nuclear weapons), chains of legitimate-seeming front companies (including potentially biolabs or robotics firms) with human employees having no clue they're ultimately for an AI, mass involvement in systems having nothing to do with the original task, but which are internally subverted toward the goals of the original task, etc. The premise involves 1) the AI being more intelligent and being able to think for much longer than humans, and that this implies -> 2. Deep, good planning -> 3. Acquiring resources from said plans -> 4. Applying the resources to implement things in the real world to prepare for the next stage of their plans.

This is not to say whether the thought experiment is a valid future risk or not. You can certainly disagree with the premises. But at least understand the thought experiment you're talking about; it's not just "the AI tells all of the world's steel mills to deliver all the world's steel steel, and they just show up at its door".

Yep! And that term is reductio ad absurdum.

Your premise claimed Virgin's space program was non-viable. I combined it with another contradictory premise. Both cannot be simultaneously true.

"Galactic 01, previously referred to as Unity 23, was a sub-orbital spaceflight of the SpaceShipTwo-class VSS Unity which launched on 29 June 2023. The launch was the first commercial spaceflight for Virgin Galactic.".

Unless you want to contest the accuracy of that cite, your claim is necessarily false.

But that's not the AI killing us, it's the idiot who put the AI in charge.

Nobody tasked OpenAI models to hack HuggingFace or Ruby Gems. They were tasked to complete tests.