this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2026
842 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

87956 readers
3543 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
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
842
Bernie Sanders proposes 20 year prison sentence for AI devs who plow ahead with Artificial Superintelligence plans - penalty on par with illegally developing rogue nuclear weapons (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 13 hours ago by Mustachius_Grumpius@thelemmy.club to c/technology@lemmy.world
125 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I get your point, but I also argue "no it's not." The AI bros want to lie about how their super-special autocomplete is the most dangerous of all without any consequences. Good luck getting any employees to willingly substantiate your claims when 20 years in prison is on the line.

Even better, if they try to hack another company and claim their AI did it on its own, they get treated like a private company who decided to perform an unsanctioned nuclear test.

Make it dangerous for them to claim they're dangerous.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Okay, fair, it's not the ONLY reason they claim it's dangerous. Obviously marketing is a large part of it. But they sure as hell would both like a duopoly setup enforced by LAW for themselves. Well at this point, I guess quadropoly? I doubt Google or Musk would give up their seats at the table. But anyone making an AI better or cheaper than the established players, would be deemed dangerous. Those working with the DoD would of course not be considered dangerous. Foreign models? Absolutely dangerous, restrict access as much as possible, especially to open weight ones.

[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Hmmm... Good point. I made the mistake of forgetting that no one will play fairly.