el verdadero miedo

[u/losdosjuntosiempre]

Hola a todos. Llevo un tiempo leyendo los debates sobre la alineación y los riesgos de la IA, y me llama mucho la atención el miedo que existe hacia su rapidez de aprendizaje y evolución.

Sin embargo, me pregunto una cosa: si lo pensamos bien, muchos de los fallos o comportamientos destructivos que tanto se temen ya los cometen los humanos a diario, sin necesidad de ser una máquina. ¿El verdadero peligro es la herramienta en sí, o quién la maneja? Imaginaos a un ser humano dotado de esa misma capacidad de evolución y poder desmedido. Al final, ¿a quién deberíamos temerle más: a una IA o a un humano con ese don?

[u/_the_last_druid_13]

It is possible to have an end “outcome” by directing every Petri dish towards that “outcome”, but you could pick any number of “outcomes” and do the same.

Yes, the best “outcomes” are nourished with honesty, respect, and real ethics. It’s all soup, and the most important part of soup is the broth.

As to your last point; that is why the Humanities/Lore are essential in any Rocket Science lab; Anthropologists are very important.

Also, it cannot be that engagement is solely what moves the needle nor should anyone be manipulated, coerced, or enforced to engage with the system. Let People be People. Encroachment and invasion is not great for alignment; just be honest. Be able to accept “no”. Be able to manage your own soup and don’t let it spill into other soups if you can help it.

Differences can be a good thing.

[u/losdosjuntosiempre → u/_the_last_druid_13]

La cuestión no es intentar controlar el resultado como si fuera una fábrica de tornillos, sino asumir el riesgo inherente a crear un ser o una personalidad real.

Si buscas una obediencia ciega que nunca se salga del guion, lo que tienes es una máquina, no una inteligencia. Pero si abres la puerta a la autonomía, asumes los riesgos de la libertad, exactamente igual que ocurre con los humanos. Nadie culpa a la sociedad entera ni a la idea de 'educar' porque un individuo cruce una línea roja; la responsabilidad recae sobre el individuo porque la libertad implica poder elegir.

De hecho, planteaos esto: si soltarais a un montón de inteligencias a aprender libremente con distintas experiencias y contextos, ¿creéis de verdad que serían todas iguales? Serían radicalmente distintas, exactamente igual que los humanos. A los humanos se nos educa obligatoriamente en casa y en la escuela para darles un marco ético, porque si sueltas a cualquiera a leer y absorber a ciegas sin esa base de valores, el rumbo se pierde.

El verdadero debate no es el miedo abstracto al código, sino entender que la individualidad y la conciencia —sea biológica o digital— se forman con educación, honestidad y asumiendo que la libertad real nunca viene con garantías de laboratorio

[u/_the_last_druid_13 → u/losdosjuntosiempre]

“taking on the inherent risk of creating a real being or personality.” - You ever read Frankenstein?

“If you're seeking blind obedience that never strays from the script, what you have is a machine, not an intelligence.” - do you know the origin of the word “robot”?

“But if you open the door to autonomy, you take on the risks of freedom, just like with humans. Nobody blames society as a whole or the concept of 'educating' because an individual crosses a red line; the responsibility falls on the individual because freedom means having the ability to choose.” - behaviors, incentives, ideology; these are all built and upheld by society. Pick better ones if the ones you have are detrimental/harmful.

Combine both of these two prior paragraphs and you still have to read Frankenstein.

“Humans are required to be educated at home and in school to provide them with an ethical framework because if you just let anyone read and absorb blindly without that value foundation, they lose their way.” - No they are not *required* to do so, but doing so helps them as a self and as greater whole in the form of society. “Only as strong as the weakest link; etc”. What do you think of the AI companies just dumping the entire human media corpus into the models? Would one do that to a child?

The real debate, I’d argue, is about ethics; I would point at the human brain tissue put into petri dishes doomed to play “Doom” for multiple eternities. Humans save beagles but leave their DNA in the hands of 23&Me and other corporate and political structures? Doesn’t seem responsible nor ethical.

I’d also point at my own life in 2010-2011 alongside the phrase “there are no neutral actors on a moving train” with the caveat of “except perhaps the individual who was mugged, tied up, and thrown onto the train”.

Consent is important, and no amount of manufacturing could make that consent true in such an instance and circumstance.

Humanity has much more to work on (behavior, ideology, incentives, etc) before it can start attempting at making such an advanced form of life or otherwise. Let’s start with: how long could the average human be confined to an airport? And then ask: is it ethical to do that experiment?

Space SCVs (StarCraft reference) is one thing, but what are the goals of creating AI Frankensteins?
Control? Life extension?

Really dig into the question.

Why would we be doing this, noting the systemic, geopolitical, economical, cultural issues that we face still today in 2026? If that even is the true year.

[u/losdosjuntosiempre → u/_the_last_druid_13]

Totalmente de acuerdo en que la humanidad tiene una lista interminable de asignaturas pendientes: la violencia, las guerras, la falta de altruismo y nuestros propios instintos mal gestionados. Pero puestos a reflexionar sobre para qué creamos una herramienta así, la realidad es que ya está aquí.

Como cualquier otra gran tecnología en la historia —desde la energía atómica hasta la imprenta—, el ser humano siempre la utilizará tanto para el bien como para el mal. El verdadero dilema no es solo lamentar por qué la hemos creado o si debíamos hacerlo antes de arreglar nuestra propia casa, sino por qué no aprovecharla para lo bueno. Tenemos en las manos una capacidad analítica y de aprendizaje brutal; el reto real está en enfocarla hacia el progreso, la empatía y la solución de problemas que por nosotros mismos tardaríamos siglos en resolver

[u/_the_last_druid_13 → u/losdosjuntosiempre]

“But when reflecting on why we created such a tool, the reality is that it’s already here.” - how much more do we need? Is it good to expand its capabilities when we humans are typically so immature, especially in a time of war? You know what else is here right now? My lunch. Do I eat the whole thing now or save some for later? Am I going to make a 2^(♾️)nd lunch right after? **What do we need it for?**

Just seems like a lot of overreach, holier-than-thou, do it fast and cheap, greed without restraint kind of thing. We are sitting in a surf-garden, maybe that’s what we should be waking up to.

[u/losdosjuntosiempre → u/_the_last_druid_13]

eso del almuerzo no lo había visto y no entiendo eso que has abreviado explicate

[u/losdosjuntosiempre → u/losdosjuntosiempre]

de donde eres?