mitchdoogle

Isn't that even more true of watching movies and tv?

My experience driving in Japan for three years is they weren't the majority there. Mostly self pump

This is about what Google shows to rank tracking services, so unless you're doing the same sort of mass monitoring of Google search results pages that they do, it seems unlikely you'd see the effect being discussed.

TV screens. TVs went from playing a few over the air channels in the 50s and 60s, and then the 70s, 80s brought cable TV and VCRs, and Video Games. 90s brought on DVR, DVDs

I've been using Opus 5 since it was released and don't understand all the hate it gets. It very well could be something in my own local memories or Claude.MD files that prevents it, but I certainly have never experienced something like that site portrays.

There's a whole blog article written by Dario Amodei, literally linked from the text "pacing the frontier" - click that and read if you need more context and understanding. The first sentence in this press release is merely stating a fact about the timeline - this is Anthropic's first release since Amodei released the referenced article.

GDPR penalties DO deter bad actors. It's so effective that many American companies without a European presence at all take actions

How so? What are you even talking about?

How come you think these things are at odds? You realize there are always going to be risks in building anything significant? It's completely valid to talk one day about all the great things your product will do, while the next day discussing the risks in building your product irresponsibly. In fact, you want someone who is open and honest about the risks, otherwise it seems like they are concealing something, or aren't acting responsibly.

This is happening now because of hugging face attack and Anthropic researchers coming out publicly saying they think there's a significant chance AI will wipe out humanity within a decade. It's happening precisely because progress is happening too fast and frontier labs are starting to lose control.

Well, smart people usually try to base their opinions on specific information instead of pulling things out of their ass. A whistleblower revealing information. Internal documents laying out a strategy, or even a desire, to conspire. Something that leads one to conclude that a conspiracy is taking place. In the absence of such information, it's just making something up, or in other words, complete bullshit. So asking for a source is trying to give that person the benefit of the doubt that they aren't just a conspiracy theorist and that they might actually have a good reason for believing what they just said.

Well, smart people usually try to base their opinions on specific information instead of pulling things out of their ass. A whistleblower revealing information. Internal documents laying out a strategy, or even a desire, to conspire. Something that leads one to conclude that a conspiracy is taking place. In the absence of such information, it's just making something up, or in other words, complete bullshit. So asking for a source is trying to give that person the benefit of the doubt that they aren't just a conspiracy theorist and that they might actually have a good reason for believing what they just said.

This reads like the morons who say, "you want higher taxes, well go ahead and send the government a check!"

Utter stupidity

I don't view this as hysteria. The fears around superintelligent AI have existed for a decade or more. That's not because AI researchers have a penchant for dreaming up sci-fi scenarios. It's because the concern is based on following a logical conclusion that any entity significantly smarter than humanity cannot be controlled or contained by humanity. That logic will always exist. Even if someone does create an aligned super AI, the logic will still exist and the fear will still be present. Because someone else could build a different ASI. These concerns are just being heard by many people for the first time, so naturally it gets headlines and a lot of conversation. The conversation will die down as all news does, but this is just the beginning of a global effort to regulate and create a framework for developing AI.

It's a bit like nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons were not a concern for most people until they were developed, tested, and used. But the people working on them were worried. Was it hysteria and moral panic to start worrying about them once people learned that they existed and how destructive they were? I don't think so. Do you look back at people during the cold war and laugh about their hysteria? I don't.

Maybe? That's not something binary like the ozone. We have no idea if there would have been more violence had past events been different.