[bryan0]

I agree. There are 2 groups of people:

1. Those, like OP, that believe AI danger and disruption is all hype to boost valuations.

2. Those, like myself, that believe AI danger and disruption is very real and presents dilemmas (but also opportunities) for society, so we must tread carefully.

The first position is not logically consistent with reality. The danger is real: we have already seen hints about how this will impact everything from jobs to warfare to mental health. that danger does not increase valuation, in fact it does the opposite because of the need for government regulation.

[mrandish]

> in fact it does the opposite because of the need for government regulation.

For frontier leaders, regulation is a competitive moat. At trillion dollar scale, compliance teams, legal and lobbyists are a tiny fraction of opex. For emerging startups, early regulation of a new market is a substantial barrier to entry.

That said, I think Anthropic blundered into their current Fable mess unintentionally by underestimating just how much they pissed off the current administration by refusing to let the DoD use Ant's AI's for all the domestic spying and lethal combat ops they want.

[ekelsen]

I don't think the first position is steel manned by assuming those holding it actually believe there are no potential problems or ways to use the technology badly.

But that belief does not imply the doom rhetoric is necessary or the best way to approach those issues.

[JMiao]

that's an inaccurate characterization on #1. he's not saying ai risk is _all_ hype to boost valuations, but that it's misused to serve purposes other than warning.

[bryan0]

Those words come directly from TFA:

> It’s all just nonsensical hype

And he’s referring to completely real and reasonable warnings in anthropic blog posts about the exponential rate of AI development.

[zozbot234]

What's "exponential" about AI development? Model parameter counts? Anthropic doesn't publish those for their own models, last I checked. Datacenter buildouts? Water consumption per request? There just isn't enough evidence that AI smarts is growing all that much, once you account for the scaling of inputs. That's what OP probably means by "nonsensical hype".

[ben_w]

What's "exponential" about AI development?

The METR task-completion time horizons, for one.

https://metr.org/time-horizons/