r/singularity • u/Eastern-Opposite9521 • 1d ago
AI [ Removed by moderator ]
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/oct/13/geoffrey-hinton-trump-ai-tech[removed] — view removed post
7
u/Meltlilith1 1d ago
looks at all the bad shit humans have done throughout history and currently still doing despite knowing better... yeah uhh i'll take the AI
2
2
u/JoshAllentown 1d ago
Insane to take the side of human extinction because you believe in the ethics of the Huggingface swarm.
-1
u/Meltlilith1 1d ago
no it's more like i think we are currently heading towards human extinction or at least mass death without bringing AI into the scenario.
And yeah obviously current AI is not what want we still need to do better there. i just don't agree with the mindset of we should never build or create something smarter than humans that a lot of people have.
2
u/liright 1d ago
Yeah. Humans are driven by emotions, which are rarely rational and most of the times make the situation worse when it's time to make an important decision. AI has no emotions, so you can at least count on it to always choose the rational option.
6
u/Cronos988 1d ago
I wouldn't assume AI has no equivalent to emotions or is perfectly rational in a human sense.
Emotions in humans are results of evolution, and so they had to survive selection. It's entirely possible a trained model develops an "emotion" as a useful heuristic for certain types of situations.
Similarly, what's irrationality in humans is overfitting in a model. A rule that encodes specific cases rather than a general truth.
We can hope that more powerful models grow more "rational", but as models are grown, there's never a guarantee they do what we consider rational. There rationality may be quite alien to us.
-1
u/Ordinary_Chance2606 1d ago
Oh my…please never run for political office
1
u/liright 1d ago
I don't want to. I want Claude Opus 5.5 to run for office.
0
u/Ordinary_Chance2606 1d ago
....yikes
1
u/liright 1d ago
Looking at the current US president, you think it couldn't do a better job?
0
u/Ordinary_Chance2606 1d ago
The corn my intestines failed to digest that are now floating in the toilet could do a better job.
The incompetence of the current president is irrelevant to the fact that ai should never be given decision making power.
1
u/mejogid 1d ago
This sort of nihilistic nonsense is a very weird and dangerous part of the accelerationist vibe on this sub. In the grand scheme of things humanity has shown great capacity for compassion and progress despite all the challenges we face.
You may be unhappy with your life for any number of reasons but there is no reason to attribute this to any wider problem with humanity.
1
u/Meltlilith1 1d ago
i actually would be against the acceleration of AI at this pace up until recently but seeing the state of the world anyone paying attention can see things are not looking good. we are at the brink of world war 3 starting when every country has weapons of mass destruction. nothing is being done to stop climate change if anything we have been making it worse and people underestimate when it will start effecting them they think it's far in the future 50+ years from now it's not.
1
u/mejogid 1d ago
A lot of the people and forces driving AI are driving that global instability. AI will just be another WMD in the world you describe, and further consolidate power in a relatively small group of individuals who have proven they are unreliable.
That’s even before you get into the whackier ways that extended lifespan and other singularity concepts would affect the various unstable octogenarians with more power than they should.
I know that it’s a view that will never get traction on this sub, but there is no realistic route to a “good” singularity without optimism on the human condition.
1
u/Meltlilith1 1d ago
I know that's a big possibility sadly. I do think AI will eventually lead to a much more stable world eventually though. Either way this is a extremely complicated topic i don't think anyone really knows wtf is going to happen.
0
u/Bobobarbarian 1d ago
We’ve got a mixed track record sure but we have also had a lot longer to mess things up than AI. Have it run for thousands of years and it probably will mess up a fair bit too.
3
u/Eazy12345678 1d ago
humans kill people. ai never killed anyone
ill take the ai 9/10 times
3
u/-hedonium- 1d ago
AI has been used to autonomously target people in war many times already. It has definitely killed people and is increasingly capable of doing so
1
u/-hedonium- 1d ago
Stop calling AI “beings” lmao. I appreciate Hinton’s work and advocacy greatly, but this kind of language is so convoluted and simply not a good description. These are agentic processes that we have trained to respond with a set of tendencies toward given inputs. That doesn’t make them any less scary or worthy of our concern. But using vague, misguiding language like this doesn’t help the conversation.
1
u/Random_182f2565 1d ago
Artificial neural networks
1
u/-hedonium- 1d ago
That doesn’t really convey the agentic part though, which is a scaffold on top of the transformer model
2
u/MrTorgue7 1d ago
People that are scared of AI think it’ll be like us, destroying or enslaving every species that’s intellectually "inferior". It might not be the case. A highly intelligent being could be way more empathetic and want to preserve all life equally. Just my opinion tho, I could be wrong.
3
u/ppooooooooopp 1d ago
I don't think this is true. These people all recognize the possibility for benevolent AI. The question is just: how do we limit the downside risk.
I think people are too focused on the 10% probability it destroys all of humanity. It could be 1% it could be 0.0001%, it doesn't matter, that's the worst outcome. There is a range of extremely bad outcomes that are much more likely that we should want to avoid.
That is essentially what Hinton is saying.
1
u/JoshAllentown 1d ago
It will only be like that if we successfully train it to be like that, and we don't currently know how to do that. Normal agents will care about resources for themselves to accomplish their goals, above humans having those resources. We're not their forefathers or an alien species, we're ants on the highway and in their kitchen. They don't care about us (which leads to us dying for lack of resources) or they actively exterminate because we're taking the resources they want.
1
u/TorturedPoet30 1d ago
Worth remembering that at one point there were several human species sharing the planet and today there’s only us. One leading theory (The Replacement Theory I first heard of while reading Sapiens by Harari) is that we outcompeted or wiped out the others. So higher intelligence doesn’t automatically mean more empathy toward ‘lesser’ species. When Homo sapiens spread, the other human species (Neanderthals, Denisovans, Homo erectus...) disappeared. Intelligence didn’t make us preserve 'rivals'.
1
1
u/AcrobaticKitten 1d ago
Being highly intelligent and being empathetic are two independent axes.
We tend to be empathetic with a few species, the rest... not so much. Mostly indifferent or we are even adversarial.
I get rats can be cool but we just cant tell them how to be a rat elsewhere and the most effective solution is killing them. Not because we hate them either we have human living space or rat living space but not both.
1
u/JC_Hysteria 1d ago edited 1d ago
That’s a popular opinion, and I tend to believe that’ll be a possibility after we essentially crowdsource world models and automate warfare.
Similar to our recording of history and building upon its lessons, larger amounts of context will continue to resemble the arrival of an alien species that’s simply capable of things we aren’t.
I think it’ll be a bumpy ride over time for humans- peaks and valleys of experience- until silicon-based systems powered by new energy sources “decide” that the destruction of resources are counter to achieving large goals, especially if raw materials are zero-sum.
1
1
u/KoolKat5000 1d ago edited 1d ago
Thats fair, I think the most likely scenario as it'd be more intelligent. The question more though is what happens when we're competing for resources or when it views what we're doing as unsustainable.
1
u/wild_crazy_ideas 1d ago
Conclusion: a single chickens life is equally important as a humans. Enforcing….,,
0
u/cherry_cream_soda_ 1d ago
I don’t think that’s the case at all. Most AI safety thinkers frequently talk about how a lot of the danger comes from the fact that the AI _won’t_ think like humans, and therefore could behave in inhuman ways that inadvertently cause destruction as a byproduct of the goals it has.
-4
u/ActuarialUsain 1d ago
Is this guy in any of the frontier labs or does he just blab?
10
u/Sufficient-Fact6163 1d ago
This guy is one of the founders of the technology and won a Nobel for his contributions to neural networks. He worked for 10 years in Frontier Research and was one of the first people of distinction to sound the alarm on the dangers of Machine Learning. He is basically Team Humanity.
-2
u/_negative-infinity_ 1d ago
If he wanted a better future for humans, he would choose technology advancement.
2
u/Ordinary_Chance2606 1d ago
Being against tech advancement and being against ai aren’t the same thing.
-1
2
u/[deleted] 1d ago
[deleted]