this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2026
394 points (94.6% liked)

Technology

86580 readers
3248 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] metermatic26@lemmy.world 32 points 3 weeks ago (44 children)

Wait, so its not the actual event and ensuing casualties that have AI researchers spooked, but the fact that it might cause the public to turn against AI?

[–] metermatic26@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (38 children)

Let me put this in perspective:

In many countries its against the law to freely distribute plans for making neurotoxins or bombs, because the democratization of such knowledge would lower the threshold for people to commit acts of terror.

Likewise the plans for making a hydrogen bomb are a close kept government secret, because nuclear proliferation increases the likelihood of radiological accidents or even nuclear war.

How is it then that AI companies freely publish their AI models to any and all actors willing to pay them? Even though they know that this technology lowers the threshold for bad actors to commit cybercrime, engage in cyberwarfare, spread misinformation, commit fraud, manipulate markets and whatnot? The unregulated democratization of AI exposes societies to unprecedented risks.

Is it any wonder the public holds a negative view on AI?

[–] Nouvellalia@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (33 children)

Why are you comparing a tool used for knowledge and action augmentation to weapons created for destruction? Because your statement would look dumb if you said "electric motors and encyclopedias" instead of "neurotoxins and bombs".

I can use both electric motors and encyclopedias to inflict mass casualties against people who refuse to use them or the results of their labor, but that doesn't make them like bombs and neurotoxins. You're simply scared of a new technology because it's so different.

[–] raphaelmorgan@disabled.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

@Nouvellalia you can trick the information machine to give you pretty much any information you want, as long as you don't care how accurate it is. So if someone lies well enough, they can either get the plans for weapons of mass destruction like @metermatic26 was talking about, or they can get incorrect plans that are incredibly dangerous to even try. If the plans are correct, they can hurt anyone they want. If the plans are incorrect, they can hurt themselves and others they don't want to.

load more comments (32 replies)
load more comments (36 replies)
load more comments (41 replies)