Bender: AI's 'Existential' Risk Is 'Fake' [video]

baal80spam

I thought it was Futurama's Bender take on AI. Was disappointed.

parkhorizons23

I really don't get why people take Bender seriously as a source for information about AI. She's been consistently wrong about model capabilities for years now, and seems to have nothing but contempt for the computer scientists, technologists, and machine learning experts that are driving this technology. Look at her bluesky with its screeds against "mathy maths" "tech bros" etc

velominati

Am I the only one that thought this would be an AI-generated video with Bender, the alcoholic robot from Futurama? Could somebody please make that?

hatradiowigwam

This is advertising for a book. This individual has zero accomplishments or credentials to lend any gravity to their opinions. Everyone has opinions. edit: typo

pipolo

Wait, the Emily Bender who just undertook an increasingly astonishing credibility conflagration on the basis that LLMs can't do arithmetic unless the answers are in their training data? That Emily Bender? Gosh, I'm inclined to agree that AI x-risk is mostly fake, but with friends like these... ( https://bsky.app/profile/colin-fraser.net/post/3mwrfschsn22p )

lukewarm707

We must stop conflating the risk of AI and the risk of AI companies. The AI is harmless. Without human input to turn it on, it is inert. The same danger as a piece of driftwood. AI employees do not have to turn the AI on. It's not compulsory! If it is risky, stop doing it. I do not see any members of the public with 200,000 GB300s, secretly training dangerous frontier models. Generally speaking, if you need as much electricity as a large city, it's quite hard to hide. The problem is not the AI, it is bad people in AI harming others; if there was no AI perhaps they would have done the same thing another way.

VCFundedGenYer

Stochastic parrots are never dangerous.