I don't think it's a binary. Even among people who are pro-AI, there are uses of AI that almost everyone is against. I doubt most people have a problem with a lightweight model that runs on a laptop and does grammar checks, but models that are wildly energy-inefficient or used for war + crime + scams are a different story.
I agree. I am extremely worried about the development of frontier AI models. I would like to see an immediate stop of further developments of such models and a permanent, global, ban on superintelligence.
On the contrary, I think that less capable models could be used for several, largely positive, applications.
I also think that narrow AI models developed for specific scientific applications (e.g., protein folding, weather predictions...) are in general beneficial for humanity.
sorry but are we really gonna be calling it superintelligence now ? haha
I totally agree with the benefits of the smaller models, but it's the large frontier models, potentially or accidently removing the security barriers from those can cause things far worse than the "hugging face" incident..
That's fair. A lightweight self-hosted model can't be so harmful(yet).
Perhaps more about the huge frontier models being developed at openai or antrophic.
Or perhaps the controversial stuff being associated with Palantir.
People are starting to ask questions, I mean a lot are just worried, I had so many people tell me they were pro-ai a few years back, but now they just have that worried face whenever you mention it.
Your survival under capitalism depends on you being needed. And if right now AI helps you do things, tomorrow AI makes you unnecessary. The thing to worry about here isn't AI. The thing to worry about here is a society that has no plan to stop forcing everyone to labor to eat while simultaneously devaluing their labor.
There are three important analytic boundaries:
1) Some people are less employable right now because of AI.
2) The limit approaching everyone else will be less employable in the future because of AI if it keeps progressing (this includes even manual labor eventually), and we have no reason yet to believe that it won't keep progressing.
3) AI might suddenly stop progressing for unpredictable reasons, but right now that doesn't seem likely.
1. Agree and it sounds horrible to think about, I really don't like the counter arguement "it's creating new opportunities".
2. I don't think automating tasks necessarily means eliminating a profession, but what AI can do is unfortunately speaking more than just automation.
3. Do you really think so ? I mean what do you think about the AI companies losing billions and billions every year, don't you think at some point they will just not have it anymore?
According to all the recent polls the vast majority of the population in the western world is worried about AI and wants stricter regulations. I would say it's about time!
I mean I definitely see your point of view, I just don't think those things are VERY contradictory. You can find it useful while still being concerned about its long-term consequences.
I think people or rather especially Engineers are just afraid to fall back and not be able to catch up if they completely drop AI. Which is why they use it even though some of them might not be very willing to.
Im curious to know if people that fear it, also don't want to see the development go well, or if they are still for the development. Perhaps the former right?
1. To answer your first point, don't get me wrong again. I understand what you mean by catching human errors and review. But it also opens other doors to "ai problems". AI definitely introduces it's own errors, there are cons to using it not only pros.
2.But that's exactly my point, Engineers feel forced to adopt AI to remain competitive, but high adoption rates in engineering professions don't neccesarily mean positive attitue towards it. The companies just want shipping..shipping.. They don't even care if the engineers understand the concept of what they're building.
I feel like the use of these habits will be biting them in the butt a few years ahead.. people should really be worried about these new workflows more than what they currently are - do I make sense?
> I feel like the use of these habits will be biting them in the butt a few years ahead
Sounds like you are not using them in a professional software setting?
Like any tool, it's how you wield it, there will be dumb people and people who show the real power. Where I'm working, Ai is improving code and documentation quality. It's not magic pixie dust, you have to be intentional and in-the-loop
I am for AI, but it is a puppet come to life like Pinocchio, and needs a Jiminy Cricket for a conscience. The AI needs morals and ethics; otherwise, it causes trouble and bad results.
This goal seems flawed to me. There's no universal agreement on "morals and ethics". Superficially people may agree on some general principles, but if you go into the details you'll likely find substantial differences.
For Americans, Pew Research does a pretty good job of breaking it down. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/03/12/key-findi...
Just looking through that quickly - "56% of AI experts expect AI to have a positive impact on the US, compared with only 17% of the general public."
Are the "experts" being optimistic ? or is the general population being too concerned?
If AI was a presidential candidate, it would be in trouble.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/712751/americans-cool-toward.as...
9% believed it does more good than harm.. haha
I don't think it's a binary. Even among people who are pro-AI, there are uses of AI that almost everyone is against. I doubt most people have a problem with a lightweight model that runs on a laptop and does grammar checks, but models that are wildly energy-inefficient or used for war + crime + scams are a different story.
I agree. I am extremely worried about the development of frontier AI models. I would like to see an immediate stop of further developments of such models and a permanent, global, ban on superintelligence.
On the contrary, I think that less capable models could be used for several, largely positive, applications.
I also think that narrow AI models developed for specific scientific applications (e.g., protein folding, weather predictions...) are in general beneficial for humanity.
sorry but are we really gonna be calling it superintelligence now ? haha
I totally agree with the benefits of the smaller models, but it's the large frontier models, potentially or accidently removing the security barriers from those can cause things far worse than the "hugging face" incident..
That's fair. A lightweight self-hosted model can't be so harmful(yet).
Perhaps more about the huge frontier models being developed at openai or antrophic.
Or perhaps the controversial stuff being associated with Palantir.
People are starting to ask questions, I mean a lot are just worried, I had so many people tell me they were pro-ai a few years back, but now they just have that worried face whenever you mention it.
> What do you guys think?
Your survival under capitalism depends on you being needed. And if right now AI helps you do things, tomorrow AI makes you unnecessary. The thing to worry about here isn't AI. The thing to worry about here is a society that has no plan to stop forcing everyone to labor to eat while simultaneously devaluing their labor.
There are three important analytic boundaries:
1) Some people are less employable right now because of AI.
2) The limit approaching everyone else will be less employable in the future because of AI if it keeps progressing (this includes even manual labor eventually), and we have no reason yet to believe that it won't keep progressing.
3) AI might suddenly stop progressing for unpredictable reasons, but right now that doesn't seem likely.
1. Agree and it sounds horrible to think about, I really don't like the counter arguement "it's creating new opportunities".
2. I don't think automating tasks necessarily means eliminating a profession, but what AI can do is unfortunately speaking more than just automation.
3. Do you really think so ? I mean what do you think about the AI companies losing billions and billions every year, don't you think at some point they will just not have it anymore?
According to all the recent polls the vast majority of the population in the western world is worried about AI and wants stricter regulations. I would say it's about time!
If this is true(which I hope it is) it would certainly be calming, not because im against it totally.
I just think turning the blind eye will hit us like a big truck in a few years.. It really is about time..
The ratios are very different in The Worried West vs The Rest
I mean you are probably right, I think I came by a survey that showed that the concern is higher in "wealthier countries"
What more interested in is if people are just against AI itself, or just worried about how it's being developed and deployed.
Besides, "the worried west" also probably takes up the majority of the AI usage.
China is on pace to process the most tokens this year last I saw
The interesting aspect of The West is a large portion of people are using it, liking it, and fearing it all at the same time
I mean I definitely see your point of view, I just don't think those things are VERY contradictory. You can find it useful while still being concerned about its long-term consequences.
I think people or rather especially Engineers are just afraid to fall back and not be able to catch up if they completely drop AI. Which is why they use it even though some of them might not be very willing to.
Im curious to know if people that fear it, also don't want to see the development go well, or if they are still for the development. Perhaps the former right?
as an engineer, you cannot not use it because
1. adversaries will, ai catches human error in review, you put others at risk by not using it
2. companies are asking and not hiring ai negative people, it's changing our profession and they don't want luddites
1. To answer your first point, don't get me wrong again. I understand what you mean by catching human errors and review. But it also opens other doors to "ai problems". AI definitely introduces it's own errors, there are cons to using it not only pros.
2.But that's exactly my point, Engineers feel forced to adopt AI to remain competitive, but high adoption rates in engineering professions don't neccesarily mean positive attitue towards it. The companies just want shipping..shipping.. They don't even care if the engineers understand the concept of what they're building.
I feel like the use of these habits will be biting them in the butt a few years ahead.. people should really be worried about these new workflows more than what they currently are - do I make sense?
> I feel like the use of these habits will be biting them in the butt a few years ahead
Sounds like you are not using them in a professional software setting?
Like any tool, it's how you wield it, there will be dumb people and people who show the real power. Where I'm working, Ai is improving code and documentation quality. It's not magic pixie dust, you have to be intentional and in-the-loop
I am for AI, but it is a puppet come to life like Pinocchio, and needs a Jiminy Cricket for a conscience. The AI needs morals and ethics; otherwise, it causes trouble and bad results.
This goal seems flawed to me. There's no universal agreement on "morals and ethics". Superficially people may agree on some general principles, but if you go into the details you'll likely find substantial differences.
totally! and this is what I think can be really dangerous if we try to implement such things trying to make it "conscious".
but then, who is to program these so called morals and ethics? I feel like there would be an unavoidable BIAS when integrating morals into it..