“Researchers say”
Researchers also say things they pulled out of their ass 90% of the time.
Source: I researched it
“Researchers say” isn’t something researchers say though but journalists or “journalists” (bloggers etc).
Guys who’s job depends on hype around their field continue to hype their field. News at 11.
All that ad space just to leave out the whys.
I like them odds
Didn’t a bunch of “researchers” think the world was going to end in 2012 for some reason?
No?
I mean, if you stretch those airquotes pretty hard, but not sure why you’d compare those people to this case
+/-95%
“AI experts’ predictions should not be seen as a reliable guide to objective truth”
You have nothing to be afraid of, Dave.
Can it happen, maybe. Will it happen. Beats me, man.
The more I think about it, the more I suspect it’ll be completely by accident. Some AI designed drug will pass all trials, get approved, be used for years or decades only to find out that some bit of it kind of acts like a generic prion that affects all life. Oh, and that bit also passes right through you, too, so by the time they figure it out, the pseudo-prion is already out there in the wild, infecting fish and other aquatic creatures. And before long the ecosystems of the world’s oceans and lakes collapse. Meanwhile land animals also start dying off due to their drinking supply being polluted by it, so a full scale ecological collapse begins. As the pseudoprion sticks around indefinitely, every attempt by nature to evolve new life ends because of it. Eventually it gets buried by all the detritus of time and new life does once again rise only to have humanity’s ticking time bomb waiting in the ground for something to dig it up and start the whole cycle all over again…
this is just a subset of the 100% chance humans will cause human extinction.
‘by ai’ is just one of very many options were looking into…
deleted by creator
