this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2026
784 points (96.0% liked)

memes

23165 readers
2587 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 35 points 3 days ago

The tech bros are pushing the “AI dangerous” narrative because it not only hypes the tech, but allows them to position themselves as the “safe option” compared to competing open models that they’d like to see kneecapped with regulation.

In reality, tech bros and corrupt governments are the reason why AI is dangerous because they’re using it to build a digital cage to spy on the populace and control the flow of information.

This is the classic Problem-Reaction-Solution technique.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 89 points 3 days ago (9 children)

I'm afraid of the tech bros and nepotism hired ceos firing everyone for greed and then ruining our economy. The middle and lower classes are going to pick up the bill. We are not the same.

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 32 points 3 days ago

Well, that too.

And the shredded books and the datacenters and the environmental effects, let's not forget those.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 days ago (3 children)

They (the AI companies) want you to be scared of AI because if you realize it's just fancy auto-complete, you'll realize it's not worth several trillion dollars and the bubble might pop.

I want you to be scared of AI because it's just fancy auto-complete; people are letting fancy auto-complete write scripts and are then just running those scripts without vetting them, and that's going to lead to disaster.

We are not the same.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MissJinx@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm a "tech bro" (lady) and I can not with AI anymore. It's dumb guys! If you ask it for something it can google, fine, but if it's a little more complex it will mess it up. Even doing a simple app interface (I was kind of forced to uss AI to do it) it was a PAIN. It took me a lot longer because I had to keep correcting it

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The gap between googling and making an interface that you like is a bit wider than "a little". And really it can do good stuff. I was able to develop a world class filling degree simulation based on existing ideas and how to improve them. No way could I have programmed that in any reasonable timeframe. That does not mean it is good in every way, please no straw.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FrChazzz@lemmus.org 20 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Now I kind of want a Terminator like film but with stupid AI. Dude goes back in time to stop the AI and the AI also sends a machine back, but it keeps getting stuck in corners and shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It's smart enough to fly a drone and return it to base for a recharge.

It's smart enough to detect/track a human.

I'm far less worried that it might decide to kill us and WAY more worried that someone who owns the AI/Drones will use it to kill us.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

It’s smart enough to fly a drone and return it to base for a recharge.

It's not.

These tools are consistently just proxies for cheap overseas manual labor. AI is consistently augmented by mirrored human actions and often just a fascade - a juiced up mechanical turk.

WAY more worried that someone who owns the AI/Drones will use it to kill us.

If Lavendar AI is any indication of how these tools will be used, they are far more often employed as propaganda - whitewashing war crimes by generating fake accusations of imminent danger and intelligence data.

You'll still be killed by a human. Maybe a manual operator. Maybe a human guided missile. Maybe just some asshole with a gun.

The AI will then fabricate the reason for your murder and feed it to the bureaucracy that helps pacify anyone who might object to your death.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

that someone who owns the AI/Drones will use it to kill us.

Or that they'll just be lazy and sloppy.

In movies you used to sometimes see someone put a brick on a car's gas pedal so they could send it through a wall, or into a lake, or whatever. In a comedy, you sometimes used to see someone rig up something so that their car could drive while they slept.

Running AI "agents" is basically like opening up some application that has a lot of keyboard shortcuts to run various scripts and then putting a brick on the keyboard.

Unfortunately, we're now at a stage where some people think that's a good idea. The machines aren't capable of thought, they have no desires or goals. But, if some of those scripts instruct a drone to go out and kill someone, the brick on the keyboard can get someone killed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] grooveygroovester@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

I'm scared of AI because people unable to read and comprehend are asking it philosophical questions using words like pretend, feelings and who/what is good enough then thinking it's answer is correct.

[–] Kennystillalive@feddit.org 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't think it's too smart, I think it's a waste of resources for what it is: a scam.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Some tech CEO chick had her AI come up with 3 things her daughter was good at because she didn't know any. That's not an AI problem. That's an AI and a parenting problems. Curiously, both could be solved with with high voltage electricity.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 3 points 3 days ago

because she didn’t know any

That's not what happened. She could think of many things but was having trouble with the vastness and complexity because the assignment was "(only) 3 bullet points".

It's still a lame reason to use the resource-hungry plagiarism machines.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 4 points 3 days ago

That's just a parenting problem.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What should specifically scare him is the pervasive low quality of management that insists on jamming AI into processes it's not ready for or even appropriate for.

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 2 days ago

Precisely what I'm talking about.

[–] bebabalula@feddit.dk 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It’s called doomtrolling. Pass it on!

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 10 points 3 days ago

Cory Doctorow calls it "criti-hype" (a term he defines as repeating a company's marketing material and adding "and that's bad" at the end), but I gotta say I like this better

Why does this still read as a class war problem?

Because if we, the masses, let things go the way they are, it will kill everyone. If the rest of us rise up against the planet and child rapists, they will be probably be killed. That's the hope and their fear, anyway

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It won't kill us because it sees us as a threat, it'll kill us because it sees us as a crop of cabbages that it was asked to harvest

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It'll kill us all because some jackass deployed LLM generation code into production without reading it first and the combine harvester's brake stopped working because a dialog box was open on the dashboard

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 days ago (11 children)

True, pure marketing - or outright propaganda.

It won't get us killed. It would require a state to plug an AI into their nuclear arsenal with full, independent target and fire permissions - there are too many humans in any state for something that absurdly stupid to happen. I know we're living in the most stupid timeline, but that's something simply not realistic to expect ever happening.

Other than that it's just scaremongering by AI companies for marketing reasons and social media influencers to make money (remember, outrage and fear generates revenue through clicks and impressions on corpo media).

[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It would require a state to plug an AI into their nuclear arsenal with full, independent target and fire permissions - there are too many humans in any state for something that absurdly stupid to happen.

The current "state" in the US is absolutely stupid enough to do something like that. The only solace I have is that most nuclear defense systems are intentionally low-tech — both for reliability and for security. I'm pretty sure the only thing stopping the current regime from plugging ChatGPT into the nuclear triad is that it's structurally impossible to plug anything into it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] SteveGoob@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Pretty much. AI won't kill all of of us because it's smart, but because it concentrates too much power into systems that are not aligned with humanity's best interest, and we dont have the means to resist it. Matthew Butterick argues it particularly well. Of course though, his argument is a challenge to the authority of these companies to develop these AIs, not a calling for the enlightened tech bros to guide humanity on the fragile path utopia. The folks developing AI could probably learn a thing or two from history.

I'm scared of the capitalist control of the world's resources, "AI" included, and every waking moment my fears are vindicated.

[–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Fear and disgust are very different things.

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 8 points 3 days ago (12 children)

I feel a little of both. Though I primarily feel fear because none of the adults I talk to can see through the facade and understand that AI is currently harmful, no matter what you are using it for.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago

I see both as equally simplistic views. The biggest thing to be afraid of about AI is how much data it is farming on you and what you use it for, and how much of a dependency it is creating to those who control it.

load more comments
view more: next ›