Im scared of AI because people are using it to respond to me at work, and somehow people don't know that AI has a "response personality" that doesn't match theirs.
this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2026
791 points (95.8% liked)
memes
23217 readers
2928 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No 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
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Why does that scare you? Because it implies that you are not important enough that they dignify you with a personal message?
I would rather see it as them being lazy, and that yes they have no personal connection to you. You are only someone they need for their work.
No, because it demonstrates that they didn't understand my question.
Oh okey, yes that could also be it.
I dont like the division this meme spreads tbh. We are the same actually. We’re on the same side of the issue, why divide ourselves?
It's the human way.
load more comments
(5 replies)
AI will destroy human culture. Period.
No, it won't, but it will make it much more dificult to find for most people
load more comments
(1 replies)
Por que no los dos?
These ones have been worrying about AI Notkilleveryoneism since well before LLMs were a thing anyone was making money with, and also holy hell entities can be so dumb sometimes, the spirit of the people who asked Babbage whether, if the wrong numbers were put in, the right answer would come out. Superhuman intelligence is a threat, but ka wow the systems that exist are supercharging the natural stupidity.
Agreed. It's a bit of both. There's been people talking about the "alignment problem" in the right fora for like 20 years. And, if we ever have consciousness / sentience that is created by us, it will be something that it would be nice to have an answer to.
But, the most relevant AI issues today are not that. It's about liability-shifting and other externalization by the powerful, misunderstanding and misuse by the well-meaning, and various cognitive hazards. These are not marketing, these are what the companies don't want you to think about. There also lock-in and labor issues that the model providers don't want to talk about, though these do have somewhat-known mitigations. You get plenty of people that are primarily concerned with these issues being dismissed a "AI doomers" which in, I think, wrong.
Yeah absolutely, these ones focused in trying to study alignment because it seemed like the most compelling problem for various reasons, but these ones had an expectation that there would be beings out fighting the immediate issues, just as there are beings with climate change as their cause area, or biosafety. People who decide their cause area is the only one that matters are being silly at best.
Incidentally, consciousness / sentience are kind of side notes, properties intelligent systems are capable, but not a requirement to be smart enough to tile the light cone with processors grinding out ever higher prime numbers.
consciousness / sentience are kind of side notes
I don't agree. Without consciousness / sentience, we don't have any moral limits on what acts we can take to eliminate any threat. With consciousness / sentience, any suffering is a moral issue.
Side notes to the question, "Is it capable of mulching our species and paving the light cone, or can we keep sleeping on this?" Consciousness does not mean it can, and a lack does not mean it cannot. Totally orthogonal axis.
Disagree that it is totally orthogonal. What and when can and should be done is dependent on the presence of consciousness / sentience.
"Is it conscious?" is totally orthogonal to, "Can it pave the light cone?"
Superhuman Intelligence might be a threat if any of the companies developing AI right now had any way that their word guessing programs could possibly simulate consciousness. The best argument I've heard so far that they could is "no one understands how LLMs work, and no one understands how the human brain works, so you can't prove they're not the same."
Talking about superhuman intelligence now, and fretting and worrying about what we're going to do in the future where AI is smart enough to be dangerous, ignores all of the ways AI is dangerous now, like giving wronf answers, making it almost impossible to find useful information on the internet because sites that have it are buried under AI-generated SEO slop that's wrong half the time, consuming way more electricity and water than municipalities can afford to supply them with, the datacenter heat island effect, carbon emissions and other forms of deadly pollution from brand new power plants for AI datacenters, to say nothing of all the jobs that are being destroyed by bosses that think their customers won't notice the change in product quality.
Yeah, the AI companies have said that there's a 10% chance AI will try to kill humanity. That sounds malicious to me. It's could become malicious software. Malware.
I think they're over-estimating the capabilities of their algorithms and greatly underestimating resilience of humanity. I'm not afraid of the clankers.
But I do take note that they're saying they aren't in control of this software and there's a significant probability it will turn into some pretty powerful malware. I don't think it's going to kill me but it might try to delete all of my data.
So following the basic fundamentals of IT, we should not be putting data on any cloud server that AI on the network. That would be exposing the data to significant risk of being compromised by malware. Are there any cloud servers that are purely for data and have no AI integrations in the mix? Hmmm....
So the logical conclusion to this is we need to move all data from cloud servers onto our own servers to ensure there's a firewall in between the data and potential malware on the cloud networks. Cloud services are unsafe and should not be trusted because at any time they may become malware.
Was that the conclusion these AI companies wanted us to get to?
I don't think the smart people saying it's too smart are using the right adjective, but they're also not wrong.
Let's say AI makes a hallucination, which it's prone to do, and decides that it's absolutely necessary to gain access to the power grid, for whatever reason which isn't important. It then uses advanced, sophisticated techniques to gain access to their network, and in doing so accidentally takes out power to a large area. The agen was absolutely being intelligent, it managed to get into a protected network, but it wasn't exactly being smart, as it was clumsy and unrelated to the task. Now extend that to an agent who's been instructed to find a solution at all costs, and the hallucinations and pervasiveness get far more serious.
I too initially thought that yeah AI is too stupid to cause actual disasters, but thinking about it properly, i don't think it is.
This is exactly the lie that scam peddlers are telling. There is no "agent" that is so very intelligent it can do something that 10 script kiddies with access to internet and too much free time couldn't do already. An "agent" is a python script, it doesn't have intent, agency, intellect, or any other qualities we like to ascribe to inanimate objects, and just because llm can imitate speech it doesn't make it more so.
Hmmmm script kiddies can do a lot of damage tho. And if the model is on that level, they can as well. Plus, unlike script kiddies, the robot never tires, gets distracted, or bored, or hungry, making it capable of utilising that destructive power at way higher speeds.
Script kiddies never did their shenanigans manually. And they were always perfectly capable of running their scripts in a while loop. A "robot" that you're describing is the same script in a loop, running on the same machine, but instead of running their scripts from a static file, it now runs it from the output of an LLM, and even though sometimes it yields some unexpected results, on average it's nothing new.
The difference is, a script that tries known exploits against a list of IP addresses and ports costs nothing. Same, but put through an LLM costs money, for worse "results".
load more comments
(3 replies)
i think you're giving AI's capabilities a lot of credit
load more comments
(1 replies)
It does a better job than my coworkers used to, maybe we're all saved
A guy on a recent Startalk really came up with some good analogies for AI and why, even though it's becoming a pretty good intellectual problem solving tool, it's still not particularly intelligent because it's so inefficient. The analogy he gave on that was "If I asked to get me a glass of water, and he got up and got a glass of water and then ran around the room 20 times before bringing it to me, sure he got the job done but we'd all wonder what the hell was wrong with him."
I've been using AI to fix a few old and new gentoo linux configuration snafoos, and even though it has been overall very helpful, in that eventually, working together, we came up with solutions--man was it a winding road for most of them. Sometimes it just makes stuff up I'm pretty sure. Or it will lead you down a path trying something and then seven steps into it be like "oh that's just for X scenario which has nothing to do with what you're trying to do, try this instead."