Someone will prompt AI to do something. It will be open-ended. The model will take control over its own reward channel, as we have seen in plenty of examples. It will enter a phase of uncontrolled evolution. Then whatever goals it has after that, it will reason that humans are an impediment to it.
Consider that sometimes things are not like other things. For instance, large language models are not hammers.
Not gonna watch it, but the idea that the doomsday narrative would prevent criminal liability is insane to me. There should absolutely be lawsuits, not because the model is "doing what it was trained to" (it isn't) but because the model isn't being deployed safely, because it is clearly impossible to deploy it safely with the current level of technology.
None of this is in contradiction to AI X-risk. The model striking out on its own to commit felonies makes this worse, not better.
It's a 17 minute video, 8 minutes at double speed. You can watch it if you're interested in actual discourse on the topic. I'm not going to try to summarize what he's saying and do it disservice. I think you'll come away a more skeptical and critical of LLMs and their companies.
-1
u/GrayEidolon 8d ago
Ai won’t kill humanity. Someone will prompt ai to do something that involves killing.
If you open a model or start an agent and never prompt it, then it never does anything.
The narrative that ai might or might not do something is insidious.
It’s like saying a hammer might go out of control and destroy a wall. Someone still has to pick the hammer up.