6 ms·

Yeah, they shouldn't be given free rein over the open internet without having to be held responsible for what the agents are doing on the open internet. I thin

Yeah, they shouldn't be given free rein over the open internet without having to be held responsible for what the agents are doing on the open internet. I think we need laws that hold individuals to account for the actions of their AI systems. They also shouldn't be allowed to openly stir fear in the public by saying there is a 70% chance we're going to be extinct in two years without STRONG substantiation. Baseless clout-chasing social media posts like this are doing unheard of amounts of damage right now.

comp_throw7 5d ago
> They also shouldn't be allowed to openly stir fear in the public by saying there is a 70% chance we're going to be extinct in two years without STRONG substantiation. Baseless clout-chasing social media posts like this are doing unheard of amounts of damage right now. Yeah, man, we should just make it illegal to express our opinions in public. Also we should apply social pressure to prevent employees from saying things that would be inconvenient for their employer, that's highly pro-social.
- nullbio 4d ago
  No, we should make it illegal to say unsubstantiated things that are highly extremist and cause mass societal panic that further ensures we really do end up in a situation that screws everybody over because power becomes centralized into the hands of those who are funding these fear campaigns, like, "there's a 70% chance my machine is going to kill you, your children and your whole family in the next 2 years" without having a single shred of evidence or rational argument as to why. Furthermore, this sort of rhetoric is not only extremist and will result in terrible regulatory outcomes, but it results in real physical harm, because plenty of psychopaths hear this stuff and go and murder people as a result. Sam Altman's house getting firebombed multiple times is an example. It's fine to speak your mind if you can present a fruitful evidenced argument, but not if you're just throwing out chaos to incite the public into a flurry.

comp_throw7 5d ago

> They also shouldn't be allowed to openly stir fear in the public by saying there is a 70% chance we're going to be extinct in two years without STRONG substantiation. Baseless clout-chasing social media posts like this are doing unheard of amounts of damage right now. Yeah, man, we should just make it illegal to express our opinions in public. Also we should apply social pressure to prevent employees from saying things that would be inconvenient for their employer, that's highly pro-social.

nullbio 4d ago
No, we should make it illegal to say unsubstantiated things that are highly extremist and cause mass societal panic that further ensures we really do end up in a situation that screws everybody over because power becomes centralized into the hands of those who are funding these fear campaigns, like, "there's a 70% chance my machine is going to kill you, your children and your whole family in the next 2 years" without having a single shred of evidence or rational argument as to why. Furthermore, this sort of rhetoric is not only extremist and will result in terrible regulatory outcomes, but it results in real physical harm, because plenty of psychopaths hear this stuff and go and murder people as a result. Sam Altman's house getting firebombed multiple times is an example. It's fine to speak your mind if you can present a fruitful evidenced argument, but not if you're just throwing out chaos to incite the public into a flurry.