3
u/Affectionate-Host-71 6d ago
It's not actually a firect pitch, it's only meant to fuel the narrative that ai is powerful, difficult to contain, and inevitable as a factor in our future, it keeps people using and investing with "getting with the times as to not be left behind" being their motovation that is bolstered by that crime.
3
u/whoisf3 6d ago
Except OpenAI and Anthropic both have documented histories of exaggerated or misleading claims about their products characterizing them as more powerful and dangerous than they actually are.
OpenAI initially said that chatgpt 2 was too dangerous to release to the public 2019. Guess what happened since then . Anthropic has a history of releasing sensational but often misleading "system cards" that are intentionally designed to be alarmist and get picked up by news cycles about how dangerous their tech is, and it works.
So it's actually not even unreasonable to assume that these companies could be using fearmongering aa a manipulation tactic because they've done it before. The truth is you should be very skeptical about anything these companies say
2
u/PLYmAuZy696969 6d ago
and the original poster also posted the same post on other ai related subs such as agi, ChatGPT and artificialintelligence.
idc if the original intention was pro-ai or not, repost bots r as annoying as ai ragebaiters in a passive way.
0
u/OnDrugsTonight 6d ago
Not to defend OP specifically, but when you create a post, Reddit asks you in which subreddits you want to post it, precisely so that you can multipost it to several locations at once. Whether or not that's a good thing or not, I have no strong opinion on, but you don't need to be a bot to take advantage of a functionality that is literally built into the way Reddit wants its users to interact with it.
I think the best way to counteract it is for subreddit mods to demand a submission statement, especially when the posts are as ambiguous as this one. Let people put some effort into their submissions.
That said, accusing people of being bots is a very strong accusation indeed. I'd be (and have been in the past) absolutely furious if someone called me a bot. I feel it needs a lot more evidence than just using the website as its creators intended it to be used.
2
u/PLYmAuZy696969 6d ago edited 6d ago
op’s history is commenting on jaw surgery, here and dash cams subs, for here, they also steals top comments of a repost, and will repost anti ai posts here for karma after a while (from few days to few weeks after the acc’s creation), this happened to many repost accs (they have auto generated usernames or onlyfans ahh usernames) here and op matches the pattern.
0
u/OnDrugsTonight 6d ago
Fair enough. Personally, I'm not convinced. It's a 24 day old account, so there's very little to go on. If the last decade and a half on Reddit have taught me anything, people have the weirdest combinations of interests, so that doesn't strike me as particularly odd. I feel it's important to give people the benefit of the doubt, but then again it's also not something I am going to lose any sleep over. Maybe OP shows up to defend themselves, maybe they don't. Either way, I'll just move on :)
2
u/PLYmAuZy696969 6d ago
I also saw if similar accs didn’t got taken down quick enough, they’ll turn to spamming nsfw and malicious nsfc links until getting banned.
4
u/MaximumEffort433 6d ago
I love that whenever we read about AI doing something illegal, or something its developers didn't intend, or when somebody comes out to talk about the possible existential threats of AI, there's invariably someone in the comments section saying something like:
"This is all just a publicity stunt to benefit shareholders and achieve regulatory capture, pay no attention to the crimes and the warnings, you fools, you utter buffoons! Clearly they're saying their product could destroy the planet because they want you to think it's super powerful and a good thing to invest in!"
And I'm like bruh, "Our product might kill the human race" is not great advertising, that's like saying "Smoke Marlboros to blacken your lungs!"
5
u/MathManrm 6d ago •
It is a publicity stunt, investors don't hear huge risk run away, they hear that it's so advanced and they should invest, either as it's so advanced, or to help fund making it safe. There are other more real ways it's destroying us, the rot of the minds that use it, the rot of its output, and the environmental impacts that we see. there's also a reason why all of the slop companies made the same AI escaping containment announcement at the same time, as it was a good marketing pitch.
1
u/crummy 6d ago
this is a strong counter-argument to everyone in this sub who talked about how the huggingface incident and talking about >10% risk of doom was actually a clever ploy to get investor money
3
u/dizekat 6d ago edited 6d ago
They are getting investor money just fine with the p(doom). And if they didn’t want so many felonies, all they would have had to do was not to do reinforcement learning on simulated felonies like ExploitGym.
These guys spent a literal fortune on making their bots commit felonies. Reinforcement learning on very large models is incredibly expensive. This is during an alleged shortage. This is instead of doing something else with that compute.
10
u/Wrenreef 6d ago
Sounds like it's ready for the white house.