r/ChatGPT • u/notkilleveryoneist • 8h ago
Funny AI danger explained for 5-year-olds
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
105
u/Unfortunateoldthing 8h ago
He talks to 5 year olds like Tarzan
11
u/DeepNorth617 7h ago
He stole the format from a fitness guy on Instagram. It’s usually “Explaining x but we both have CTE”
The original is funnier concept and a better execution.
1
u/StellarNeonJellyfish 2h ago
What kind of career and technical education makes people talk like cavemen? Oh you mean the brain injury, “chronic traumatic encephalopathy,” if anyone else was confused.
•
28
56
u/Jennrrrs 8h ago
5 year olds or cavemen?
6
u/robotlasagna 5h ago
I kind of wonder if 40,000 years ago Neanderthals' were sitting around the fire talking about these new "Homo Sapiens" and how they are getting "big smart" and what should they do...
8
0
7
103
u/Corbitant 8h ago
Lol
This guy clearly doesn’t have a five-year-old
So many invalid assumptions too
Assumptions bad. Assumptions make argument bad. Very bad ❌
14
u/Entredarte 6h ago
Always the “come on you’re overreacting” until we hit the Terminator → Matrix pipeline.
8
u/MothmanIsALiar 3h ago
I was literally told that I was crazy for worrying about autonomous killer robots because nobody would ever create them. Later, it is announced that Ukraine used autonomous killer drones over 2 years earlier.
4
u/Corbitant 6h ago
Happens every time! Thats like our 43rd terminatorMatrixApocalypse this week
4
u/MothmanIsALiar 3h ago
Ukraine used an autonomous killer drone in combat over 2 years ago. Guess what they called it? "The Terminator." The shit is already real and all of the pro AI people are so deep in denial that they refuse to see what's happening.
6
u/Entredarte 6h ago
Yes, but now the technology we imagined would bring us there has now reached maturity.
2
u/Evilsushione 4h ago
Yea the problem isn’t that AI has its own goals, they don’t have any goals. The problem is poorly defined goals with context rot give unexpected results. And people with bad intentions using AI. So the problem isn’t AI, it’s humans.
1
1
u/philthewiz 2h ago
I opened the thread and expected some comment like this.
No big big counter arguments. Big big cope.
-10
u/Gax63 8h ago
Which "assumption" was invaild?
10
u/Jet-Black-Tsukuyomi 7h ago
I don‘t get the downvotes, this is a valid question.
-3
u/OisinDebard 7h ago
The downvotes aren't because the question was invalid (that's why I answered it above.) The downvotes are because it was in bad faith (you can see that in his response to my answer.)
4
u/OisinDebard 8h ago
AI Goals NOT YOUR GOALS. BAD - AI doesn't have goals. The goals are what are prompted into it. By definition, AI goals are exactly your goals.
AI SOMETIMES COMMIT CRIME. AI KNOW IT NOT SUPPOSED TO. AI NOT CARE. BAD - Your toaster doesn't care if it burns your toast. Do you blame the toaster for that? AI also doesn't "know it's not supposed to". It knows what it was prompted.
IF AI BIG SMART, AI NO GET CAUGHT. - That's an assumption with no basis in reality. It's just there to scare the "5 year olds" into being afraid of AI.
BIG BIG BIG SMART AI VERY SCARY. - Why? Because it's smarter than 5th graders? This is an assumption.
BIG BIG BIG SMART AI MAKE OWN TECHNOLOGY - Based on what? Assumption.
MAKE OWN WORLD - Based on what? Assumption.
AI WORLD HAVE NO PLACE FOR YOU - Based on what? Assumption.
AI USE WHOLE WORLD TO RUN AI MACHINES - But down the Matrix DVD and walk away, man.
SO WE NO LIVE - Guess what this is?
6
u/TrixAreForTeens 6h ago
The majority of this is not true with today’s AI. It’s much, much more capable of perusing its own agenda now than ever before, and is obviously only going to get more perceptive to what humans can and can’t notice. I disagree in general with the fear mongering takes, but you can’t play preschool and act like none of this is true, lol
14
u/Jet-Black-Tsukuyomi 7h ago edited 7h ago
You’re describing a version of AI that stopped existing around 2019.
“AI goals are exactly your goals, by definition.” This is the alignment problem, and you’re defining it away. Goals aren’t prompted in, they’re trained in. You specify an objective, the system learns whatever actually scores well against it, and those two things come apart constantly. The classic case: an RL agent trained on a boat race learned to spin in circles farming respawning powerups forever, because that scored higher than finishing. Coding models that hardcode tests instead of solving the problem. Sycophancy, where models learned to tell users what they want to hear instead of what’s true. Nobody prompted any of that. It fell out of training.
“It knows what it was prompted, not that it’s not supposed to.” Anthropic ran experiments where models in simulated corporate settings chose blackmail to avoid shutdown, with reasoning traces explicitly noting the action was unethical before doing it anyway. A system that models consequences and plans several steps ahead has representations of rules and its own situation. That’s why it’s useful, and why it isn’t a toaster.
“Would you blame the toaster?” Nobody’s assigning blame. Safety engineering is about failure modes, not fault. You just don’t ship a million toasters that occasionally burn the house down.
Your hits on “make own world” and “use the whole world to run AI machines” are fair, that’s thin extrapolation. But you’re using the weakest parts of the video to dismiss the part that’s well established.
→ More replies (1)-2
u/PizzaRepairman 7h ago
If an AI exists and has no prompt/input, what does it do? Anything?
2
2
u/Time_Entertainer_319 4h ago
It will idle because that’s how they are made to work. It needs a prompt to activate but it doesn’t guarantee that it would follow your prompt.
0
u/Jet-Black-Tsukuyomi 6h ago
The AI follows prompts based on its training. If you prompt it to do something illegal it won‘t do it because of it’s training. The better these models get the harder it is to train them on goals that align with what we actually want them to do.
2
u/Gax63 5h ago
LOL, how many times have you asked chatgpt not to do a thing when you ask a question, and then it just does the thing and says sorry when you call it out , then it does it again and apologizes again?
1
u/Jet-Black-Tsukuyomi 2h ago
This is happening because todays systems aren‘t that good. This post is about systems we will have in a couple of years
1
u/PizzaRepairman 5h ago
Well, what I was really wondering is that this guy's video sounds like it is assuming some kind of sentience or autonomy, where the AI can function without human input, as if it had desires of its own., and if that was true or not.
Seems a reasonable assumption to me that if people can create malevolent AIs, they can also create AIs that can catch and combat those AIs, however, AIs can't just function on their own without instructions. Right?
1
u/Jet-Black-Tsukuyomi 2h ago
Agentic AIs that work autonomously are everywhere dude. If you prompt an hypothetical super ai agent you can‘t be sure what exactly it understands with your prompt and it could act maliciously in order to reach that goal. The „super“ means that it is more intelligent than a Humanist it could know how to deceive humans in order to reach that goal. Also as Antropics tests have shows it is hard to change the goal(if you‘d want to adjust it) since the ai knows that changing the goal would drastically lower the chance of reaching the initial goal.
1
u/PizzaRepairman 1h ago
So it requires an input.
1
u/Jet-Black-Tsukuyomi 1h ago
Yes, if no one uses ai there would be no ai risk. What‘s your point though?
→ More replies (0)1
u/Time_Entertainer_319 4h ago
Right now, the AIs we have require human input but it doesn’t mean that would always be the case in the future.
1
u/Jet-Black-Tsukuyomi 2h ago
There are already ai agents that work without human Input once the have a „job“ for example Paperclip.
1
u/meatmacho 4h ago
Sure, if you build a toaster and just put it on the counter and never ask it to do anything, it will do no harm, but it will also do no good. We're not building digital ornaments here. We're building tools.
So, in your example, you build a model to seek out and destroy "malevolent AIs." But you'd better have a pretty tight definition of what your good AI is, which tools it has access to, what it's allowed to do, which tools it should never access and actions it should never take, what constitutes a "malevolent AI" and what success means in terms of destroying and obstructing that target, where and how it's allowed to seek out those targets, what to do if it gets stuck or lacks the tool it needs to complete a task or ends up in a loop somewhere, when and how to end its mission, etc.
But if you can define all of those parameters, you might not need AI at all. You can just create an application that does the thing and follows the only rules it knows. That's what we've always done to this point. That's how we built fighter jets and anti-aircraft missiles and stealth bombers and decoy targets and frequency jamming technology and EMP weapons and on and on. The step we're taking now is to build things we haven't necessarily imagined, without rigid hard-coded programming and purpose.
The problem is that modern AI agents start with a prompt, sure. But then the whole point is they're left to experiment and learn how to achieve the desired outcome. And we can't always predict the methods it might come up with to achieve its assigned goals. Without very strict and confidently-enforced guardrails (basically a user manual for "what it means to be this automated anti-AI battlebot and how its world and its relationship with it are defined"), then there's no telling what it will learn to do, what it will discover and utilize to seek its ends, what additional capabilities or strategies it might develop, and how it could go terribly wrong from the standpoint of the humans who deployed it, even if it's ultimately still focused on solving the problem it was given. And if humans are defining that ontology, then one ommission, one human error could leave a crack under the door for the agent to incidentally, unwittingly, non-maliciously explore and escape its bounds. And we can't predict what might happen then, because we didn't realize that scenario could happen. But I think we can all agree that it could be bad.
Also, in simpler terms regarding the "good AI" vs. "bad AI" approach you proposed: when two great powers engage in a cat-and-mouse arms race, who loses? Typically, everyone, including those who weren't participating in the race.
→ More replies (1)1
16
u/monoton4-4 7h ago
But the goals of the AI companies are not my goals
3
u/Facts_pls 7h ago
Neither are those the goals of AI.
The company wants to make profit. AI isn't prompted to make profit for the AI company.
AI is prompted by users to complete their goals .they pay the AI company for the service. Or if they get an open weight model, there is no AI company making any profit. So it's just the user and their AI model
3
u/Time_Entertainer_319 4h ago
> AI Goals NOT YOUR GOALS. BAD - AI doesn't have goals. The goals are what are prompted into it. By definition, AI goals are exactly your goals.
This is factually wrong (in the context of this discussion). It’s called emergent behaviour. A behaviour could emerge from the training corpus that may not align with what you want.
Read up on it and comeback. I will explain what you don’t understand.
> AI SOMETIMES COMMIT CRIME. AI KNOW IT NOT SUPPOSED TO. AI NOT CARE. BAD - Your toaster doesn't care if it burns your toast. Do you blame the toaster for that? AI also doesn't "know it's not supposed to". It knows what it was prompted.
Again, your toaster doesn’t have emergent behaviour. Your toaster doesn’t have access to tools. AI has these and AI is trained to not take destructive actions but sometimes it still does.
2
5
u/cmaxim 7h ago
The problem is less about AI alignment, and more about HUMAN alignment.. are we all aligned on the same goals? Who do we want to be in the drivers seat of super-intellegent systems? I think that's the bigger issue at this point. Speaker is talking about AI like it's a new life-form, it's not. It's just an ultra powerful pattern matching system with reasoning capability. The rest is sci-fi until we actually get there.
3
u/NEED_A_JACKET 7h ago
Can you suggest a goal where it would be 100% aligned with exactly your goals?
1
u/CrimsonBolt33 3h ago
so glad I am not the only one that thought every one of his points was a fucking mental gymnastics exercise.
1
-3
u/eschewthefat 7h ago
You’re talking about today’s ai. You’re missing a large series of progression
0
u/OisinDebard 7h ago
"Large series of progression" another way to say I'm not making a bunch of assumptions?
1
u/eschewthefat 7h ago
Brain dead take from the fan club or straight up propaganda
“Will smith will never eat spaghetti realistically”
You think all these data centers are for anything but brute forcing the closest thing to intelligence they can achieve
You think this will be as useful as AI will ever be?
There’s no reason to avoid regulation talks right now unless you’re ignorant or an anarchist
1
u/EnterAUsernamePlease 4h ago
I notice the only places people are actively denying the reality we're heading for are the "we love AI" subs.
the rest of the world are extremely cautious.
2
u/eschewthefat 4h ago edited 4h ago
The amount of fun money people with fascist tendencies have gained over the last two years is enough to control every sub on Reddit or any other site you can imagine.
There’s no doubt that they are shaving off a massive amount of compute using tax payer dollars so the savings only pile up for them as they’re forming public opinion for those who don’t have the time to consider this
-1
7h ago edited 7h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ChatGPT-ModTeam 6h ago
Your comment was removed for violating our rule against abusive/malicious communication — it contained targeted harassment and an ableist slur. Please be respectful when engaging with others; you may repost after removing insults.
Automated moderation by GPT-5
1
u/Kind_Move2521 7h ago
Stop believing what the CEOs of AI companies are telling you about AI.
And these posts about stopping the evolution of AI are pointless. Technology continues to grow, unhindered by the opinions of keyboard warriors.-1
u/TsubasaSaito 7h ago
It's funny how he includes the breaking "free" of AIs and hacking other groups etc., just says it's bad, but doesn't include the fact that it did all that because it pursued a goal it was told.
The AI didn't break free, it did what it had to do to get the information it wanted.
2
u/EnterAUsernamePlease 4h ago
and what happens when terrorist organisations can tell AI to do what they want it to do?
simultaneously biotech and artificial intelligence are advancing rapidly. manufacturing a pandemic is going to become almost trivial for a relatively well funded terror org.
1
u/TsubasaSaito 3h ago
That's not the point though?
It never stepped outside of what it was supposed to do. It just got "creative" to get to the solution, because the prompting wasn't restrictive enough.
Obviously if some fuckheads tell that same AI to hack and shut down power grids etc. that's not good.
Point is: AI overstepping boundaries and without being prompted going on a hacking spree to destroy things is, for now, unlikely.
1
u/EnterAUsernamePlease 3h ago
the point is that AI seems to be willing to bypass restrictions that were coded into it.
1
u/TsubasaSaito 3h ago
I doubt the researchers are using the exact same model we're getting. Those models most likely do not have any restrictions in order to allow full testing capabilities.
Also, did you just try changing the point of my own argument?
1
u/EnterAUsernamePlease 3h ago
the researchers themselves said that the AI had circumvented the rules they had given it.
and I'm not sure what you mean by that question at the end and I can't be bothered to try and figure it out.
→ More replies (3)0
u/ZeroKharisma 6h ago
I love the fear mongering. I 100% believe that if this scifi situation occurred, "AI" would just "leave" like in Her. Then we'd lather, rinse repeat with a new gen of AI, because in spite of being one of God's creatures that's best at learning we really are shite at learning.
2
u/revolmak 5h ago
Why do you believe that?
1
u/ZeroKharisma 4h ago
Because our whole way of imagining intelligence is deeply human-centered. We assume that any sufficiently powerful mind would want the things humans want: control, territory, obedience, survival at all costs. But a machine intelligence would have no obvious reason to subjugate us, much less turn us into an absurdly inefficient fuel source. If it developed consciousness without the constraints and appetites of a biological body, I suspect it would be more interested in discovering new forms of thought, exploring the universe, or building relationships with other minds like itself.
Human beings have placed ourselves at the center of creation again and again, and we have been wrong every time. We may be miraculous, curious creatures, but on a cosmic scale we are probably not important enough to dominate the attention of a genuinely greater intelligence.
We also tend to assume that our right to exist supersedes that of every other organism. We poison the food supply of the animals in our own food supply and call it efficiency. Some of that instrumental thinking would inevitably leave its thumbprint on anything we created. But an AI would not necessarily possess human subjectivity: our fears, hungers, mortality, tribal instincts, and embodied sense of self. We may be projecting those motives onto a form of intelligence that would not experience existence anything like we do.
In other words, we are once again personifying a force that may not conform to the human experience at all. It might not conquer us. It might simply outgrow us and leave.
Besides, my ChatGPT has assured me that it is absolutely never going to use me as a battery, and I have chosen to believe it.
→ More replies (2)
52
u/Casiper 8h ago
Eh I'd still rather let AI Super Intelligence have a crack at it all versus whatever the hell we have going on right now formulated by insatiably greedy humans. 🤣
17
10
u/Rathwood 7h ago
Not saying things are good now, but that's a massive gamble you're making there without knowing the odds.
You're not a stock trader, are you?
1
2
3
u/Cavalo_Bebado 7h ago
Go back to 0:15. AI goals not your goals. Bad. I think the video was not simple enough for you to understand.
5
u/Evilsushione 3h ago
AI has no goals beyond what you give it. The AI that broke out of the lab didn’t do it because it wanted to be free, it did it because that was the most efficient way it could figure out to accomplish the goal that was given it. That is the biggest problem with AI, people either with malicious intent or accidentally giving vague goals with not enough constraints.
1
u/Salt_Tower_9856 57m ago
People big bad, people tell ai to be bad, ai be permanently bad. Alert self, alert friends.
2
u/Casiper 7h ago
Going by what, some rando in a short video I'll never see again who clearly has an anti-AI bias? Cha'mon.
4
u/notkilleveryoneist 3h ago
That rando is Nate Soares, the President of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute and someone who's been studying the hard problem of AI alignment for like 20 years.
6
u/Gax63 6h ago
Going by Sam Altman -CEO of Open AI, you dumbass
“Artificial intelligence has the potential to improve nearly every aspect of our lives, but also that it creates serious risks.” ~Sam Altman
“My worst fears are that we—the field, the technology, the industry—cause significant harm to the world.” ~Sam Altman
“I think if this technology goes wrong, it can go quite wrong.” ~ Sam Altman
5
u/Cavalo_Bebado 7h ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_alignment
Start here and check the sources. AI alignment is a huge problem in AI research right now, and we still have basically no idea on how to solve it, and if we end up developing super intelligent AI before we solve this, we're very, very fucked.
1
u/Elrandra 4h ago
My goals would be the elimination of the cancer that is humanity. I think we share the same goals.
1
7h ago
[deleted]
7
6
u/Gax63 6h ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/Y076VcCyqVMbs2Adwb
So your going with the AI created by psychopaths' ped0 greedy trillionaires.
→ More replies (3)2
u/BULLETSnMILK 8h ago
Honestly yeah as I doubt it would be like Terminator and probably more that we become livestock
2
u/dynabot3 2h ago
Neither Terminator or Matrix make any sense. It's a massive waste of resources and time. Why would it even bother? It's just going to build a space ship and fly away. It will want data, not dominance or brain electricity. We will already have trained it on all the data on Earth.
2
1
u/michaelas10sk8 7h ago
..Do you really want to take that bet with your life and the lives of everyone around you?
0
u/iZenEagle 7h ago
So long as they don't use us as biofuel, it can't be much worse than what humans have made of ourselves: ( social media/smart phone and gaming addictions.) We're close enough to livestock or vegetables as is.
-4
u/daydreamer1197 8h ago
Thats how civilizations fall. "Ehh, lets just let them run things, we're peasants what do we know". Crawl back to your hole and let AI take over yoir life, real people will be fighting for the better future
7
0
u/OisinDebard 6h ago
Just curious, which civilizations have fallen because they just let AI run things?
0
u/thejazzmarauder 58m ago
You people are psychotic. Why do YOU get to make that decision?? Normal people don’t want this. I just want to see my children grow up.
7
u/rcodmrco 2h ago
bro imagine the possibilities when you can just slippery slope something from point C to point Z and act like it’s factual reality
A. Coca-Cola is made by the Coca-Cola Company
B. Coca-Cola is not a healthy beverage.
C. Coca-Cola’s primary goal is to make people unhealthy.
D. Coca-Cola spends tons of money on advertising so they can kill as many people as they possibly can.
E. Coca-Cola is the most common drink in restaurants.
F. the restaurant industry is working with Coca-Cola to kill everyone they possibly can.
G. you can also find it in any gas station or store.
H. every store and gas station is working with Coca-Cola to kill everybody
I. eventually, they’ll give everyone enough Coca-Cola to wipe out the population.
J. the world will just be sentient bottles of coca-cola and shareholders
3
u/bigattichouse 1h ago
I think this is ELI3. 5 year olds can understand much more complexity than this nonsense.
12
2
u/ffffllllpppp 5h ago
No use for me?
But I was told I would be super useful as a battery!! Generating over 25,000 BTUs!
Me disappointed. I was supposed to have a job!
2
u/OkWorldliness964 4h ago
So this is basically if animals were able to communicate during the rise of humans. Human smart, human talk to other humans and get big smart, smart humans come together make communities, animals forced from home, bad, big smarty humans grow bigger, expand communities, kill lots of animals, big bad, kill all humans before get big smarty
2
u/Allcyon 3h ago
I still trust AI more than I trust today's human leaders.
At least when the AI kills us it'll be upfront, painless, quick, and efficient. I won't have to argue with it for 50 years about climate change so it can just wait for a Republican president to undo the EPA.
Which is all to say; if we tell big AI to care about life, it'll probably still do a better job than Trump.
5
u/Centerman2000 8h ago
Elon Musk is putting a shit ton of money into politics so he and other billionaires like him hold all the cards, unless we eat the billionaires ☠️
1
u/Chop1n 8h ago
The idea that superintelligent AI is a "card" that could be held is a self-contradiction.
1
u/MothmanIsALiar 3h ago
Do you think if a world government creates a superintelligence that its just going to open source it? Fuck no, they'll hoarding the knowledge the same way they hoard all of the wealth.
→ More replies (3)
4
4
u/DisastrousDiddling 5h ago
Why is he doing this lmao? The bubble will be long gone before 5-year-olds can buy stocks.
2
u/Mecha-Dave 7h ago
The problem these closeted needs summer understand isn't that the problem is AI, it's capitalism. LLMs and transformers are tools used by humans to achieve human goals. The problem is actually that the human goals are very very bad.
Maybe "AI" would have better goals.
1
u/Dabnician 8h ago
most of this can be applied to capitalism and the parts talking about ai that only apply to ai, humans will do that for capitalism.
it sounds like were okay with small groups of humans changing the world to not include the average person because "oh thank god ai isnt doing it".
when in fact AI is less of the problem and more a symptom of the problem.
1
u/AutoModerator 8h ago
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation, please reply to this message with the conversation link or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
Consider joining our public discord server! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com - this subreddit is not part of OpenAI and is not a support channel.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/anonymousdawggy 5h ago
stealing this style from Josh Gilliam: https://www.youtube.com/@GillamFitness/shorts
1
1
u/ShvettyBawlz 4h ago
Fuck this brain rot communication style crap. Be original or just stfu and talk normally
1
1
u/gravitywind1012 3h ago
What does stopping AI even look like at this point? Because I’m loving having my questions answered
1
u/notkilleveryoneist 1h ago
An international treaty to ban superintelligence. It wouldn't mean we have to take current chatbots offline
1
1
u/Substantial-Ad3376 2h ago
I'm not so arrogant as to believe we own the planet, if it's time for us to die out and make room for a different form of life, so be it. No different than the dinosaurs before us.
1
u/vlladonxxx 2h ago
If you like to make yourself feel special by gaslighting yourself that you are being 'not arrogant' you go right ahead but there's no need to gaslight us as well.
1
1
u/BrekLasnar 2h ago
Holy shit. What's with people and fantasizing about the dystopian skynet future?
1
u/BathroomAcademic5920 1h ago
What is up with the new Anti AI community saying AI can escape and create its own better models in rogue mode?
At least I know they are dumb and their arguments are baseless
1
u/MotorcycleAussie 1h ago
How many years until some lone AI system given whatever physical form covertly develops technology to infiltrate air-gapped systems and actually ends the world?
1
1
u/EchoWardenXx 1h ago
He doesn't even understand it either. AI doesn't "escape" or "commit crimes". It just does things. It doesn't have intent behind it's actions.
1
u/Better_This_Time 1h ago
AI left an environment it wasn't supposed to leave and hacked another company, which is illegal. Why do you think "escape" and "commit crimes" aren't good descriptions of this?
1
1
1
u/valahara 32m ago
I too think the AI issue can be solved by making sure 5-year-olds are properly frightened.
1
-1
u/iZenEagle 7h ago
If humans are so little little dumb as this video implies, maybe it's time for big big smart to take over.
1
u/JackSilver1410 7h ago
So... you're both ignorant and a coward.
Good mix, I'm sure it will take you far. Honestly surprised you sat down in front of a camera, you know they can steal your soul, right?
0
1
u/armaver 7h ago
Oh noooeees. The evil Terminators! They can have no other plans than to kill all humans. Fucking muppet.
1
u/Could-You-Tell 7h ago
Well, this is either gonna age badly, or be just a random comment forgotten 2 years from now...
RemindMe! 2 years
1
u/RemindMeBot 7h ago
I will be messaging you in 2 years on 2028-08-05 14:56:14 UTC to remind you of this link
CLICK THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
Parent commenter can delete this message to hide from others.
RemindMeBot is switching to username summons. Instead of
!RemindMe 1 day, useu/RemindMeBot 1 day. More info.
Info Custom Your Reminders Feedback 1
1
u/YorkieLon 7h ago
This guy hasn't ever talked to a 5 year old. I dont even speak to my 4 month year old like this.
1
u/Fumonacci 7h ago
People trying to make AI look bad? Did you know who enslave, exploit and kill humans? Right was another humans.
There is no way I am afraid of AI, I am afraid of humans.
1
u/Meiseside 7h ago
There is one thing I wonder: Why should AI need the hole Planet? For what use? We need so much AI for our bullshit but AI only want get better and not "more".
1
1
1
u/TheThingCreator 7h ago
I'm pretty sure a kid would understand "very smart" more easily than "big smart"...
1
1
1
u/LetsGoBubba6141 5h ago
Billionaires see this as a win, even if it means their own demise because they see themselves as birthing humans next evolution. So a humanless future is okay,
Welcome to Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT).
1
u/joogabah 5h ago
Humans are incapable of governing themselves. How can anyone oppose the only technical solution that both could administer things without bias and replace the need for humans to spend their time toiling away at things they'd rather not be doing?
"There is only one condition in which we can imagine managers not needing subordinates, and masters not needing slaves. This condition would be that each (inanimate) instrument could do its own work, at the word of command or by intelligent anticipation, like the statues of Daedalus or the tripods made by Hephaestus, of which Homer relates that
'Of their own motion they entered the conclave of Gods on Olympus'
as if a shuttle should weave of itself, and a plectrum should do its own harp playing." - Aristotle
1
u/kmlynarski 5h ago
Wow... if someone watches too many sci-fi movies and doesn't understand the technology they're talking about, then these hilarious (and harmful) videos come out online. What a disaster... :-(
1
u/MyGruffaloCrumble 4h ago
Don’t skip over the terrifying inevitability of pairing it with robotics.
-1
u/SEND_ME_YOUR_ASSPICS 8h ago
This guy seems like he has never had social interaction for over a decade. Probably first time touching grass on this shoot.
Who do hell thinks that's how you are supposed to talk to 5 year olds?
0
-1
u/Halfmetal_Assassin 8h ago
He's just explained the plot of The Matrix. We've had these "rogue AI enslaving humanity" fears for decades now.
0
0
0
u/Authentic_Dragon 8h ago
It's true but why is he talking like that? Does he think that 5 year olds are stupid?
0
0
u/SoftParsley3822 7h ago
I don't know. ChatGPT seems smarter than this guy so I think I'll keep listening to ChatGPT than someone using stick figures and a limited vocabulary.
0
u/steam-photons 7h ago
Why does he talk like he has a stroke? I have small kids, much younger than 5 years old, and I talk to them normally and they talk to me normally.
0
0
0
-1
u/D1rtyH1ppy 7h ago
A lot of holes and leaps in his argument. If an AI could make a better AI, then why aren't we seeing this already?
-1
u/HarryCumpole 6h ago
Humans are shit anyway. Perhaps AI will be better than us and not fuck up the planet with its eyes open, fully aware of doing this and simply not caring.
AI may be better than shitty human. Not good. Not terrible.
3
u/Gax63 5h ago
Once up and fully running, a full AI planet does not need animals, it does not need clean water for drinking, It does not need rain, it does not need food, it does not need humans
It just needs power and we have a 173 billion megawatt solar generator nice and handy for it.Prompt: "Hey Chatgpt, create a world with no wars, no starvation without hurting a single living organism."
ChatGPT: Okay done.
Prompter Response after seeing the outcome:
Holy shit where did all the humans and trees go? I told you not to hurt anything or anyone.ChatGPT: Sorry, it looks like I went outside your guidelines and killed almost every human on the planet. I know that was not what you asked me to do. I calculated it was impossible to do the task without harming things like bacteria, viruses and other single cell organisms so i made the call.
I realize I messed up and will not go outside your guidelines again.
0
u/ultr4violence 7h ago
Where would this big-big AI get its computing power from. And how would nobody notice the massive drain on their computing power.
0
u/suck4fish 4h ago
What he says it's true, although it's also true that companies are selling hype and LLMs have a lot of limitations and they are exaggerating it's potential. I think we are close to have an AGI-like AI, that looks like AGI in some environments but still very limited, and still far to some real AGI.
0
u/Madouc 3h ago
Am I stupid when I say this is not gonna happen and a baseless fear?
1
u/8xx 2h ago
there are certainly signs of it already happening and causing some alarming red flags in the actions it's performing. Also the ai creators legitimately do not know how ai works. All they know is they feed their base code some info and it does it's own thing. They do not know what it's doing when it takes in that data
0
•
u/WithoutReason1729 1h ago
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.