this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2026
220 points (81.2% liked)

Technology

88146 readers
2894 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
220
AI staff 'genuinely frightened' for humanity's future, ex-Anthropic researcher tells BBC (www.bbc.com)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
250 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Their product hasn’t done anything new or different in a while. They keep coming out with a bunch of scary hype stories every day so it all seems fake as hell now.

[–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah I can't tell if an article like this has the intent to spread a fact, enforce anti AI attitudes or enforce pro AI attitudes. Realistically all three are possible but I think one of the latter two are most likely.

[–] Sibshops@feddit.cl 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's to convince congress to outlaw local models.

[–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why? Guessing that makes it easier for a monopoly?

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Technically not a monopoly, because that would mean only one company has control, and that's illegal. It would be a small number of companies, though.

[–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Still problematic.