[Simon321]

Do we do things like this for other technology or for other software? Why the huge intense fear as soon as someone puts a label 'AI' on a piece of software?

[pyrale]

> Do we do things like this for other technology or for other software?

In fact, yes.

Some of them are even scarily named: https://eusprig.org/research-info/horror-stories/

It is a healthy practice to have public databases of incidents, so that others can learn from our mistakes.

[kfarr]

> Do we do things like this for other technology or for other software?

Totally! https://www.faa.gov/data_research/accident_incident

[tnorthcutt]

While some people certainly respond with "huge intense fear", I suspect others might only want to provide a small counterpoint to "huge intense hype".

No idea if the creator of this site falls into the former or latter group... or neither.

[ericd]

It seems like a lot of people are using it to do real, actual, helpful work, especially learning about new topics. I'm not sure it's productive to call it hype at this point.

[JohnFen]

"Hype" doesn't mean that there's nothing useful. It means that the benefits are being exaggerated beyond what the evidence supports.

I think that holds extremely true in the AI space right now, with people talking about AGI being right around the corner, etc.

[tnorthcutt]

Oh to clarify, I don't think it's all hype! But, in my opinion, there is plenty of breathless hype (much like any other new development).

[ummonk]

Yes, we do. It’s AI accelerationists that are the ones demanding special treatment of being able to deploy potentially dangerous technology without any regulations and without doing any work to verify and demonstrate it is safe.

[jeremyjh]

Is that really special treatment ? There was no NTSB before the first train derailed and killed people. We usually wait for a new technology to kill a lot of people before we address questions of safety.