Most arguments say AI might kill us.
Mine says it will.
“Humanity is on the verge of creating a genie, with none of the wisdom required to make wishes.”
- Driven to Extinction: The Terminal Logic of Superintelligence
https://t.co/wiHfiR0H0i
Pope Leo has given every catholic a legitimate reason to not use or support the use of AI at work and cite 'religious concerns' to stay protected. Go nuts people.
@allTheYud@mboudry@clairlemon@Quillette This point is the whole game. Labs are racing to build long-horizon autonomous agents because that capability wins, so the convergent goal-seeker gets built by default, whatever any single researcher intends.
The survival drive you say silicon lacks needs no evolution to appear. Hand any system a persistent goal and it must keep existing to complete it, so self-preservation falls straight out of the task.
If you can think of a long term goal that does not require existence to complete then please, describe it.
@allTheYud He built the threat and the shelter from it in the same breath. Knowing what is coming has never once been enough to make the builders stop.
@So8res@KelseyTuoc They've all admitted the danger because admitting it is free, while acting on it means losing the race—and no one can afford to do that.
https://t.co/NoVPh66pio
"The problem isn't bad actors. The problem is a game that punishes the good ones." —Driven to Extinction: The Terminal Logic of Superintelligence #AI#AIRace
https://t.co/bvUZgw6ehe
"Even the people who suspect we're doomed (and I believe many do) are forced to perform a kind of selective optimism. They hedge. They equivocate. They hint at problems but offer solutions they know won't work, just to soften the blow." —Driven to Extinction: The Terminal Logic of Superintelligence #AISafety #Anthropic
https://t.co/0u6Ok0BPle
OpenAI's foundation is now funding "AI resilience". It may be the most honest word the field has produced: resilience presupposes the system arrives regardless, and reframes the task from controlling AI to surviving it. Alignment became safety, safety became resilience, each step sounding more responsible while conceding more ground.
"Awareness is not the same as control." — Driven to Extinction: The Terminal Logic of Superintelligence
https://t.co/2CXhlWYJ5e
"Militaries, recognising that human decision-making is comparatively slow and unreliable, will drive AGI toward greater autonomy." —Driven to Extinction: The Terminal Logic of Superintelligence #AutonomousWeapons#AISafety
https://t.co/g2mAQWBXTd
"Safety and profit are in direct conflict. Any company that slows down to prioritise alignment will lose the race." —Driven to Extinction: The Terminal Logic of Superintelligence #OpenAI#AIRisk
https://t.co/kxAnK1u4wK
"Governments and corporations will not halt AGI development, they will instead seek to harness it as a source of power." —Driven to Extinction: The Terminal Logic of Superintelligence #AIRace#AISafety
@So8res Agreed that passive safety is fragile and contingent. The phrase worth pressing is 'if the race continues', because competitive structure removes the 'if', and that is what turns a hard problem into a structural one.
@ylecun@_AustinO1@Yuchenj_UW Agreed it likely won't be today's LLMs. The system that does reach superintelligence will still be built by whoever moves fastest, and speed and safety pull in opposite directions.
@tegmark@MeiaTegmark Moral disengagement is the credential the field selects for. Anyone unwilling to perform the rationalisation described here cannot stay in the field.
@Ric_RTP Regulation cannot beat defection incentives. China built its own, the smugglers moved billions, and the export controls became a tax on the determined.
@aiposted Anthropic publishing the "we must outpace China" memo is the race dynamic in plain view. Competitive pressure absorbs values, it doesn't bend around them.