A.I.

[PerreaultForever]

49 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I can say with 100% confidence that this applies only to images and the kids can't identify fake info and info sources for *****. 

Ya, but if you talk to them they also kind of know this so they already start with the assumption that  nothing is true. That's not a good thing, because it means they don't process real information/news either, but they don't quickly assume something they see is real which is what older people still do. 

[pi2000]

6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

The hell is "ASI"?

super intelligence

[LGR4GM]

10 hours ago, pi2000 said:

super intelligence

Idk what that means. 

Oddly enough I have copilot open right now for something. AI does have uses for sure. 

[_Q_]

13 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Ya, but if you talk to them they also kind of know this so they already start with the assumption that  nothing is true. That's not a good thing, because it means they don't process real information/news either, but they don't quickly assume something they see is real which is what older people still do. 

Maybe they are right!

[LTS]

23 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

What is more dangerous, what A.I. can do to us in the future, or what "A.I. companies" are doing to us right now?

There is a story I just heard on business radio that the new Facebook/Meta app Muse (their AI app), when installed on an iphone, is apparently ignoring users permissions to limit what it can access, and it is uploading data, including text messages, to their ai servers/data centers.

That isn't a danger of A.I. yet, that is a case of companies doing whatever they can for money and control.

 

https://appleinsider.com/articles/26/09/28/metas-new-ai-agent-blatantly-ignores-users-permissions

In a completely unsurprising turn of events, Meta's Muse AI is stealing Apple Messages, past and present, and uploading the contents to its cloud, even if explicitly told not to.

 

Meta says that Muse has to obey permissions that users set up. It won't access any data you don't explicitly allow it to access.

Of course, Meta also hedges, a lot, right at the top of the "How Muse works..." page, saying:

"Your Muse can make mistakes or take unexpected actions," Meta says. No kidding.

Facebook has proven itself over and over again as a company not to be trusted. The AI is just an extension of that.  I don't trust them for anything.

22 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

That is the thing that isn't getting enough attention.

Whenever you have a question and you just 'ask A.I.', for the answer, you aren't 'thinking' of how to come up with that answer yourself. When you want a task done ad you 'just ask A.I." to do it, you aren't learning or exercising your ability to do basic tasks.

We are going to turn into a bunch of bags of skin that are just good at 'asking A.I.' for our basic needs. I sometimes think is A.I. going to turn us, in just a couple generations, into peopel depicted in Idiocracy?  But I think we are more on the way to becoming a society like on the ship in Wall-E.

This is a real risk. However, I don't think it's an AI issue so much as a people issue again. We've been conditioning our children to stop critical thinking through changes in the education system. We push them to question information and instead teach them to blindly accept it.  AI only exacerbates that issue. As someone who uses AI tools every day I don't find my critical thinking lessened. I find the time I spend on menial tasks lessened.  I still question everything and read it through.

I'm not saying it's not an issue. I just think we'd be better positioned if we actually encouraged healthy skepticism and critical thinking skills in our youngest population.

16 hours ago, Jävə Keith said:

Agreed. Look at how GPS has impacted our internal sense of direction. We grew up using our brains, figuring out whete we were and then reading maps to determine how we needed to get to where we wanted to go. Then we looked for landmarks and read signs along the way.

Now we just blindly follow an icon on a screen or listen for an artificial voice telling us when to turn.

Apply tbe same to using AI ubiquitously and we train our brains to rely on something else. Not to mention losing all of our critical thinking skills.

We are becoming more and more "sheeple."

 

This is a stretch with GPS.  One could continue that argument to say carpenters who use nail guns and power saws have diminished their skills. To a certain extent that might be true, but its about convenience and benefit.

I would rather trust my GPS routing system to get me somewhere versus having to stop and look at a map all the time. And you know people would just try to look at the map and drive at the same time.

 

[Jorcus]

I don't know where AI is going to take us. I don't think it's going to wipe us out but it may change us in ways we never thought of. If you have some time to kill give this old movie a watch. Creation of the Humanoids 1962. It's not the most exciting thing on film but watching parts of this science fiction film come true in real time is quite freaky. Will there be an order of the flesh and blood in our future? The human supremist organization. Will our sisters date the robots? Will the robots make themselves more and more human. Its's amazing the writer Jay Simms could have dreamed this up 65 years ago. 

A link to the movie on youtube    

 

 

In case the clickers destroy the internet in the near future it's been nice conversing with you all. GO SABRES!

Edited September 30 by Jorcus

[Slack_in_MA]

I think having the heads of AI companies asking for regulation speaks volumes. What other industry does that?

[#freejame]

11 minutes ago, Slack_in_MA said:

I think having the heads of AI companies asking for regulation speaks volumes. What other industry does that?

They are asking for regulation for two main reasons: first and foremost they believe that it signals to their potential investors the power and capabilities it will be able to unleash, thereby bringing them more money. Second, they want to regulate out any competition that isnt already competitive. The more hurdles and red tape for development, the easier it is for the major players to control the industry. These companies don’t actually give a ***** about safety. It’s all just hollow platitudes. 

[Slack_in_MA]

11 minutes ago, #freejame said:

They are asking for regulation for two main reasons: first and foremost they believe that it signals to their potential investors the power and capabilities it will be able to unleash, thereby bringing them more money. Second, they want to regulate out any competition that isnt already competitive. The more hurdles and red tape for development, the easier it is for the major players to control the industry. These companies don’t actually give a ***** about safety. It’s all just hollow platitudes. 

Name me one other industry throughout history that asked for regulation for similar reasons that you’ve stated.

[#freejame]

8 minutes ago, Slack_in_MA said:

Name me one other industry throughout history that asked for regulation for similar reasons that you’ve stated.

Regulatory capture is a very real thing. It’s all over the place. 

[#freejame]

There’s entire books devoted to regulatory capture. I’d imagine it’s the basis for many of PhDs. Here’s an overview: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-capture.as

[ska-T Chitown]

not for nothing, but AI is not the only driver in data center growth. Did it accelerate it? Sure. But, this site lives in a data center. Netflix, Hulu, Disney+ - all streaming services use data centers. Youtube, spotify, apple music. Data centers. Literally anything and everything that goes to your computer, smart TV, or phone goes through a data center. And pre-AI, that was still continuing to grow.

That said, Yes I agree that unfettered unregulated AI is bad for society. But on some level, so is most of the technology that has happened from the Industrial Revolution through today in one way or another. 🤷‍♂️

[mjd1001]

The other thing about data centers....Obsolescence?

Some of these are huge. There is one going up in Wisconsin that has 4 huge/massive building on a site that is about 700 acres.  What happens to them when they are no longer needed?  Or how much more money has to be put into them every couple years to keep them from being outdated?

-All factories, auto factories, steel factories, get periodic updates. But the chips that run these data centers, they get outdated a LOT quicker than an assembly line that builds F-150s.  

-How fast can the industry change?  In the USA, we are doing A.I. more 'hardware' based. China (and other nations around the world) are in some cases making almost the same advances that is more software based?

These places could be abandoned in 10 years.  Or they could cost almost as much to update them every 4-6 years as they cost to build.  

[Big Guava]

People think there needs to be some huge advancement for AI to cause serious issues, but that's not the case.

All the things AI would need to essentially change human existence the way we know it already largely exist. I'm not talking about extinction event or anything like that, I am talking about fundamentally changing the way we live day to day that could send us into chaos.

Things like:

- altering/deleting records by breaking into databases: Bank records, criminal records, government records, medical records, etc

- taking over all media so that you could never trust what you see or even hear since it could create fake videos, fake audio, fake texts, fake anything and everything. Worse, AI now has enough information on most people via social media, people chatting with AI, and other online records that it could literally target each person individually based on it's profile of them.

- infiltrating all utilities (water, gas, electric) via the electronic controls systems they use. 

- infiltrating all gas station pump electronics so that they would not work.

- infiltrating all POS systems so that they would not work (although if it shut down electricity that wouldn't matter)

- infiltrating Wi-Fi networks so that it blocks all human traffic.

All of this exists right now for AI to use. This requires ZERO additional technology. All it requires is an AI that can coordinate and sufficiently adapt and work together along the networks, spawning endless sub agents.

And the technology for this is actually frighteningly close, which is why there is so much alarm all of a sudden and so many calls even among those in AI to slow down.

Because once this escapes, there is no turning back and there is not really much humans would be able to do to stop it.

 

[Indabuff]

Just seems to me lots of people are indifferent about this.  To me, you'd think this would be a major talking point around the water coolers.  Maybe I watch too many fiction movies but a robot that can outrun Usain Bolt coupled with AI that can apparently go rogue scares the hell out of me.

[Mango]

On 9/28/2026 at 10:42 PM, mjd1001 said:

Its hard to say. The vast majority? No. It seems to me half/half.

I have read articles and watched videos of 'expertes' who sound the alarm and make a compelling case that humankind will be destroyed in 5 years. Then I'll find another article/video saying how AI is basically a bubble/fraud, and the only near term danger to humanity is people using it to hack into a system and gain control of something they shouldn't.

So many arguments on either side.

I will say this slightly off topic. The term "A.I." is being used in many cases where it isn't artificial intellegence at all.  Its seems there are a lot of computer programs, a lot of 'apps', that are nothing more than code that doesn't think, that doesn't learn, it just runs, but yet people want to label it A.I.  sure there is some stuff out there that tries to learn, but if its a glorified web search, that isn't intellegence to me at all.

I think both are true and they are measuring two different things. They don't counter each other whatsoever.

1. We don't really know how it works. Which means that as it evolves we may or may not be able to halt its progress, or even unplug it. This is true. 

2. It is not providing any economic value, it is not saving companies money, they are not producing scaled profit. There is loads of money, resources, time,
stocks beigh bought and sold with no return. 

Both of these left unchecked are very very bad.

[Mango]

8 hours ago, Indabuff said:

Just seems to me lots of people are indifferent about this.  To me, you'd think this would be a major talking point around the water coolers.  Maybe I watch too many fiction movies but a robot that can outrun Usain Bolt coupled with AI that can apparently go rogue scares the hell out of me.

If they become capable of biuilding their own chips we are in a rough spot. 

We are already starting to struggle to keep AI in its sandbox during testing phases. The network is super distributed across the globe, the next stop would be compressing itself and replicating across multiple servers. There is no "centralized internet" so you can't just unplug it. 

 

[mjd1001]

I just read an interview, someone talked about "A.I." and tryed to sum everything related to it up in one sentence and I thought it was a good statement.

For the Average person:  They feel like A.I. is something that is happening TO them, not FOR them.

[LTS]

On 9/30/2026 at 8:19 PM, ska-T Chitown said:

not for nothing, but AI is not the only driver in data center growth. Did it accelerate it? Sure. But, this site lives in a data center. Netflix, Hulu, Disney+ - all streaming services use data centers. Youtube, spotify, apple music. Data centers. Literally anything and everything that goes to your computer, smart TV, or phone goes through a data center. And pre-AI, that was still continuing to grow.

That said, Yes I agree that unfettered unregulated AI is bad for society. But on some level, so is most of the technology that has happened from the Industrial Revolution through today in one way or another. 🤷‍♂️

Yes, however AI increases power draw at an exceedingly higher rate. The race to build data centers is about tapping into markets where the electrical grid is not yet overloaded or the regulations in the area favor higher output electricity (nuclear). For all the items you listed there's very little data center need. It's more about storage and transmission of data than processing and generation of data.

For content based solutions most service providers actually operate their own caching servers which further decreases the load on any single data center.

For my company, the vast majority of deals we close for data center transport are for AI based companies. 

On 10/1/2026 at 10:31 AM, mjd1001 said:

I just read an interview, someone talked about "A.I." and tryed to sum everything related to it up in one sentence and I thought it was a good statement.

For the Average person:  They feel like A.I. is something that is happening TO them, not FOR them.

It's interesting, but for the most part that's a statement I would make about a lot of things, especially when they are in their infancy. Also, I think that the media likes to portray a lot of the negatives of the industry.  What's not being talked about as often are the amount of good executions of AI that are improving daily life. Utilization of AI to examine and improve code in industries that have notoriously shied away from spending money on coding intelligence will benefit everyone. This is especially true when it comes to operational control mechanisms.

Like anything, it's a tool. I'm still far more concerned about the security of a smart phone than I am AI. 

The risks are there. It wouldn't take much to crash this country. Destruction of records, etc. (someone posted it earlier). I just don't think AI will do it by itself. I think it will be people who use AI to find security holes who are the threat right now. This my original point being its about the people who use the tools right now more than the tool itself.