this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
751 points (99.0% liked)
Funny: Home of the Haha
9307 readers
291 users here now
Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.
Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!
Our Rules:
-
Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.
-
Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Other Communities:
-
/c/TenForward@lemmy.world - Star Trek chat, memes and shitposts
-
/c/Memes@lemmy.world - General memes
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This seems quite accurate. Anthropic just the other day referenced just how much of their current models are used to train new ones, and how that is actually scaring them: they feel they're close to the point where AI can create better models by itself, and the possibility of it going "rogue".
In any case, existing models are probably better than most humans at interpreting text:
This reads like a salsa company worrying their new salsa is just too darn spicy- marketing.
Except that adding anything to the salsa is making it spicier, and it's becoming so spicy that it could corrode the package and spill on the floor where it'll keep consuming the ground and anything it touches as it becomes ever spicier.
🤷♂️
I wish it were that easy.
Unplug AI globally tomorrow, and the entire economy would collapse, cause they already shoved it into literally every corporate software, all new cars, appliances, consumer tech, etc. Front- and backend.
And those systems weren't designed to fail gracefully.
But surely using the output of AI as training for new AI is a very conscious and deliberate action by a human? And should be cancelable? 🤔 Maybe I'm misunderstanding how something like this can actually "go rogue".