I’m not an AI techie and I’m not well educated on LLMs/AI in general. The issue I’m having is the dichotomy between how people talk about it. I’ve heard completely opposite ends of the spectrum. From AI is quickly becoming advanced enough to threaten human society, all the way to its a glorified dictionary/search engine that can’t really do much of anything. I know Lemmy has a steep anti-AI slant. But, can someone talk about this in a way I can wrap my head around why the divide seems so big?

  • fodor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago
    1. No, their opinion would not be the most informed. They are biased in favor of making money. They know they can’t deliver on strong AI, but they’d be happy to milk your fears.
    • TronBronson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      We’re talking about mid-tier employees that left the company… I mean i guess there incentives could be to pump their shares they undoubtably have… They’re all quite wealthy now in context. Maybe he just wanted 5 minutes of fame…or maybe they understand the trajectory of the technology. Maybe they are genuinely concerned and we should at least acknowledge that?

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        There are motives for whistleblowers to lie. Book sales, political careers, other attention. The executives they accused, though, just said they were right

        • TronBronson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          of course there’s motivation for everything, which one are you assigning this individual and based on what technological disagreement?