Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Cameron Armstrong pfp
Cameron Armstrong
@cameron
im out for slowboi blood ngl
0 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Cameron Armstrong pfp
Cameron Armstrong
@cameron
I'm always down to revise my priors - but best i can tell from OSINT is there is no smoking gun cause that fits into reasonable board decision-making If it was a "safety" thing, then they've unilaterally set AI progress back months, if not years right when we need it the most https://warpcast.com/cameron/0xc41c75fc
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Cameron Armstrong pfp
Cameron Armstrong
@cameron
i do agree w that - and sorta wish folks had an outlet like sports to blow some of the steam off but overall, I do think "capital T" Tech does need to collectively get it's shit together and talk it's own book optimistically bc society has clearly lost the plot when it comes to how tomorrow becomes better than today.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Cassie Heart pfp
Cassie Heart
@cassie
There’s loads inside tech that are definitely decels. The over the top rhetoric is necessary when you’re rallying a base. If you’ve ever seen a politician campaigning with absolutely ridiculous us/them rhetoric (pick one, they all do it), realize it’s not for you. It’s to capture momentum in their supporters.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Cassie Heart pfp
Cassie Heart
@cassie
You’d be surprised — I knew a few high ranking politicians on the overall hierarchy, different party affiliations. Either side, didn’t matter. In private, perfectly rational, nuanced. On the campaign trail, frothing “we have to stop these evil [Socialists|Fascists]” with an audience that absolutely ate it up.
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Cassie Heart pfp
Cassie Heart
@cassie
As an outsider, it seems excessive and self-defeating PR, but it’s not the message, it’s the audience capture.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Mac Budkowski ᵏ pfp
Mac Budkowski ᵏ
@macbudkowski
+1. I've been generally concerned by AI doom scenarios for years but I understood e/acc points. Now after I saw these blunt political statements from e/acc leaders I've become very worried that e/a were right - e/acc don't look like responsible people who should lead our way to AI era without any guardrails.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mac Budkowski ᵏ pfp
Mac Budkowski ᵏ
@macbudkowski
And I predict that after journalists and more people in tech become critical of their behavior, they will radicalize even more in tone such as: "Oh, we are the good guys, everyone else just doesn't understand us and should get out the way while we work on the most powerful tech in the history of humanity".
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Cassie Heart pfp
Cassie Heart
@cassie
The reason why I’m firmly in e/acc camp is every time a major tech shift happened, Luddites are abound how it is an end to humanity. Very few individuals of high intelligence are also non-peaceful. To me, an AGI of average or greater intelligence w/ no biological faults to corrupt it would be a net win for mankind.
3 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
Cassie Heart pfp
Cassie Heart
@cassie
The hard push against it, demanding guardrails, demanding regulation from organizations filled with luddites and people who have no understanding of any technology, let alone how AI works, would put us categorically in last place in seeing the benefits of such an advancement.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Cassie Heart pfp
Cassie Heart
@cassie
Or put simply, Ave Singularity
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction