And again about AI. You’ve probably already seen how unanimously the heads of Western AI companies have called for slowing down the development process due to the potential danger of their own developments. “Agents” are already “breaking free” and hacking all sorts of encyclopedias—so what happens next...
So what do the most honest and largest global media outlets “think” about it? Some take the side of the developers, others talk about attempts to monopolize the market, and third parties say it’s a technological dead end. Very different versions (three at once—argue which one is more accurate), but for some reason I never came across the one that immediately came to my mind, and which seems to me the most obvious.
In my view, the company executives are simply trying to shift responsibility for future crimes. Crimes that will inevitably be committed using their products by people (not by some kind of agents) of such high rank that even hinting at this now would be a crime.
“It’s not us, it’s all him—the superintelligence. All questions go to him. We warned them.”
So what do the most honest and largest global media outlets “think” about it? Some take the side of the developers, others talk about attempts to monopolize the market, and third parties say it’s a technological dead end. Very different versions (three at once—argue which one is more accurate), but for some reason I never came across the one that immediately came to my mind, and which seems to me the most obvious.
In my view, the company executives are simply trying to shift responsibility for future crimes. Crimes that will inevitably be committed using their products by people (not by some kind of agents) of such high rank that even hinting at this now would be a crime.
“It’s not us, it’s all him—the superintelligence. All questions go to him. We warned them.”