this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2026
395 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

87550 readers
3177 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] joe@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (11 children)

I don't understand the question. Yudkowsky's book is on my reading list, but judging by the title, I assumed it to be more on the side of restricting AI research, which best aligns with what I think (but suspiciously you refuse to clarify) your stance is.

When I said "the experts" I meant all the people working on AI at these frontier AI companies. You know, the experts?

[–] XLE@piefed.social 3 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)

I disagree with Yudkowsky in pretty much every way possible, and don't know how you could conclude I agree with him if you saw anything else I posted in this thread. He's like you, he believes AI is inevitable and wants it to be good too.

When I said “the experts” I meant all the people working on AI at these frontier AI companies

Interesting how you conflate "expert" with "employee" when determining who you trust. Do you see any conflict of interest here?

And I asked you earlier about why these "experts" never sound the alarm about the environmental or mental harms of AI. I wonder why that is... Do you think it hurts their bottom line?

[–] joe@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

I answered your non sequitur as a show of good faith. Your turn: what precisely is the stance you're arguing here?

[–] SallyStrange@eldritch.cafe 2 points 2 weeks ago

@joe seems pretty clear to me.

-"AI" isn't inevitable
-people who claim otherwise are mostly doing marketing for products in which they're invested
-experts on "AI" should include more than those employed by the companies trying to make a profit off it

Yudkowsky was not a non sequitur; you were asked which experts you consult, you then refused to name any, so your interlocutor tried speculating about who might qualify for you.

Hope this helps, Joe!

@XLE

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)