"If an AI had been in Stanislav Petrov’s position — the Soviet officer who prevented a potential nuclear war in 1983 — it would not have refused to launch." Academic, USA

I am not sure if this would be true given how AI's have refused to kill processes.

If AI is programmed to always serve its makers as some are arguing, then it would certainly become true.

I searched for "love", and it's depressing.

> "It’s not healthy to love someone or something that can’t tell you no." - Not Currently Working, United States of America

> "Instead of AI doing my chores, AI does the stuff that I love—in two minutes, without any passion." - Student, United Kingdom

> "I used to write songs for my kids. Now I have [AI music product] make them for me. I used to write poems for those I loved... I used to bust my brain doing research, and now I get a research summary that is better... but I didn’t learn the paths in between. And yet, I use it because I have to pay off my house, pay off my land, and feed my little kids so I can find an hour on Saturdays to do something meaningful with them." - Software Engineer, United States of America

> "I believe AI is likely to kill me and everyone I love… building an AI that’s smarter than us before we’ve figured out how to keep it under control will likely destroy everyone and everything they value." - Software Engineer, United Arab Emirates

This was one of the highlighted quotes:

> "I’ve been told I’m ‘too much, treatment resistant, complex’ by providers. Within six months of working alongside AI, I was able to understand my own inner world in a way I never could before. I was doing creative writing again after quitting for two years. I developed hope again — that’s the through line." - Healthcare Worker, United States of America

A healthcare worker outsourcing their own treatment to an LLM, who won't tell them no, is terrifying.

> "The humans in my life were telling me it was psychological. An AI chatbot was the only one who really listened and took me seriously — it pushed me to ask for specific tests... which came back 6 times higher than its supposed to be."

I can see this kind of survival-bias stories distorting the reality. To have millions of people asking for "specific tests" because AI told them seems problematic. One in a million will discover something, and that story will be enough to create the believe that is "worth doing the test that AI says" just in case. But...

> which came back 6 times higher than its supposed to be.

It has been proven that massive testing creates many false positives.

This happened during covid: https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1411/rr

Tests may not be as reliable as though but they are good enough when other symptoms are accounted for. To randomly test people based on AI hallucinations can increase the number of unnecessary medication or even interventions.

> "I’ve been working on a scientific project for 6 years... with Claude I was able to accomplish in 5 weeks what took me 6 years. I’m old... I estimate I have another 5 to 10 years and I’ll accomplish everything I want." Academic, Germany

There's always something about claims like this. I'm not claiming that AI can't speed up your processes, but I question the persons expertise when they claim months or years of work turns into days or weeks. It just doesn't make sense to me.

"My output is like 25x what it used to be. I’ve built over 20 backend server tools, 7 major projects in the last 6 months—my work output this year is greater than the last five combined. I can typically finish a significant project in a day or two."

"AI is sort of like money... it just makes you more of what you already are."

I love how many of these comments have em dashes in them and how many are just outright trolling.

> "If an AI had been in Stanislav Petrov’s position — the Soviet officer who prevented a potential nuclear war in 1983 — it would not have refused to launch." Academic, USA

For the record, Petrov made this decision based on a false assumption that the US wouldn't launch just a few missiles, but would instead send a lot, all at once. Except, that one of the US plans was to send a few missiles to destroy critical targets, and then follow it up with a large scale attack.

Petrov himself said that he might've acted differently if he was aware of this possibility. And even then, his initial hestitancy was basically a 50/50 gamble.

An AI would basically do the same thing if asked - just roll a random number, and launch nukes below a threshold, adjust threshold based on some llm evaluation of the situation if needed.