• LuckyDevil@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      Who do you suppose they are marketing to? People who want to die? People who want to see an extinction event?

      • SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 month ago

        People with a boner about how powerful it is

        This is basically marketing for it. With the quiet part being “we will absolutely make sure it stays powerful, but make sure it doesn’t kill us all”

      • stellargmite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Anyone and everyone, though firstly a credulous media… in order to contribute to the huge scam: that this is a product which has some value commensurate with the spending, let alone has any utility. Falsely claiming this faulty overbloated software product is intelligent is their sales proposition in the first place, so messaging that its ‘going rogue’ , acting of its own accord, and other such bs contributes to that. The lack of decent questioning journalism , rather than parrotting pr statements, makes this very cheap marketing but almost almost at zeitgeist level.

  • belastend@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 month ago

    Hey, you absolute fuckers: if this is even remotely true, why the fuck are you not sabotaging this shit? You, as the researchers? Poison data, manipulate algorithms, fucking bomb the data centers, but do something.

    • jonathan7luke@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      There’s been multiple pretty interesting exposés on this. The TL;DR is that a lot of the high profile figures in the AI space have a god complex where they believe AI is inevitable and by being involved in the development, they might be able to steer it in a better direction. So really, the classic “if I don’t, someone else will” excuse.

    • Rioting Pacifist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Or just put useable guardrails on it.

      I have to use Claude for work, if they were actually worried about safety it would be far easier to control the permissions of processes instead they basically let you filter strings that it executed in a subshell.

      Modern computing systems can be pretty fine grained around network and systemcall access (including inheritance to prevent escapes), none of these tools do that, because this is just marketing not real fear.

    • Wakko@hell.cloud
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      They’re not doing anything about it for the same reason you’re not doing anything about it.