this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2026
234 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

87183 readers
4110 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
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 1 points 12 minutes ago

I'm so blackpilled on the average person. These stats mean nothing because the average person not trusting a tech company does absolutely nothing to push them away from it. 80% distrust AI but 50% use it and the stat is growing.

[–] Eryn6844@piefed.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 hour ago

there you go! keep using that noggin!

[–] Solrac@lemmy.world 2 points 19 minutes ago

Nah, why would anyone love AI when we can just--

Let's all love Lain!

I don't just think AI should be regulated, I think everyone at the hyperscaler companies should be criminally indicted. Every employee at OpenAI and Anthropic working on AI development should be indicted on 8 million counts of child endangerment.

The relevant statute is California 273a.

It is a crime in the state of California to allow a child to be placed in a position where great harm could come to them. For example, people have been indicted under this statute because they had drugs in the same house as young children. Even if no children are actually hurt, simply putting them in a situation where harm is likely is the crime.

It would normally be quite difficult to prove that the actions of OpenAI and others are endangering children. But the very words of these companies would be the first exhibit of the prosecution. They've openly confessed to their crimes! These very same companies and their leaders have repeatedly said that they're building machines that they themselves believe have a reasonable chance of destroying humanity. And the children of California are a subset of humanity.

Whether their claims are realistic or not, I cannot say. But I simply believe that it is legal to build a machine that you yourself believe could destroy the world. We're so glazed over by the novelty of AI that we forget to treat it like any other threat. In most places it is a crime to perform some action that you believe has a realistic chance of hurting people, even if you have no intention or desire to hurt people.

Well, according to OpenAI, the machines they are building represent a very real risk to the life and safety of every child in the State of California. I see no reason that they shouldn't be charged with millions of counts of child endangerment. According to their own words, they are literally putting the lives of children at risk. That is a crime. That is not legal. And we should stop pretending it is.

[–] Rolive@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 39 minutes ago) (2 children)

If AI gave correct answers 95% of the time instead of <50%, didn't cause massive inflation in computer parts and doesn't completely fuck the environment I'd be somewhat in favor of it.

[–] lmuel@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

"If my grandmother had wheels she would've been a bike"

[–] Rolive@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 41 minutes ago

Yep, the reality is different so to hell with AI.

[–] stretch2m@infosec.pub 1 points 35 minutes ago

It would still be dogshit for how slop has infused the human creative domain, and for how it contributes to brain rot. In fact, being more correct would probably make both of those things worse.

[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 34 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

Maybe the kids are gonna be alright, after all.

[–] tangeli@piefed.social 13 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

AI is just one of several serious existential threats the kids will have to deal with. They're far from alright.

[–] iknewitwhenisawit@fedinsfw.app 10 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

"The kids are alright" does not mean that the world where the kids live is alright, it means that the kids are alright. 😅

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 2 points 12 minutes ago* (last edited 8 minutes ago)

We got THIS close to being done with nicotine and bullshit in the air in daily life, and then the kids discovered vaping.

At best, the kids are in the aggregate no better or worse than the generations before them. No generation is going to save us from stupid when stupid is part of our species' DNA.

[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 1 points 7 minutes ago

The Epstein class is their biggest threat by far. AI and what they do on private islands are just two of many reasons to get rid of billionaires.

[–] Zarobi@aussie.zone 1 points 1 hour ago

Anecdotally, all our young family members don't trust A.I. at all.

Once, I asked it a question as a joke, (I think it was about "Labubu"s or something I'm out of touch about); they told me it sounds like fake news 😂. I asked the tool if we could trust it, and it said something like "no, don't trust me", which was hilarious.

I think kids these days have a good bullshit detector, by necessity.

[–] username_1@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 hours ago

But older people still trust surveys. So no, we're doomed.