Lol!! This is literally her AI channel. So, someone was dumb enough to offer her AI bot money, to say that AI is bad?
I think all the anxiety around AI would significantly diminish if we had trust worthy leaders in tech overseeing it all.
Like, I’d have trusted the google of the early 00s.
She could (ultra likely) be lying about “AI advocacy group offering to pay for topic coverage”
RSI is completely irrelevant to AI being used to mass murder. Models improve from better training, better GPU programming, and better architechture for faster/memory utilization. Training data sets/runs are already fully automated, and AI proposing new training data is a productivity boost, but needs curation to best optimize. OP is moron/liar for picking examples of autonomous training designed to cheat at benchmarks. Better GPU programming does have AI assisted pathways. Again curation is useful/recommended. Architecture improvements are also expert led, regardless of AI assistance.
The vast majority of model development costs are entirely the GPU rental required for training runs. any architectural/gpu efficiency improvements have to be very certain before spending $10m+ on validating it through training suite.
AI is 100% certain of killing the majority of Americans, and leading to mass murder overall, with our existing political establishment, because establishment needs to preserve itself, and its supremacist right to global domination. It is explicit goal of our establishment, and zero regulations/discussions occur in public on restraining that supremacist orientation, and any and every tool to maintain supremacism will be maximized. It is the mission of the US empire to kill us all. It is the AI bond villains mission to neutralize any opposition to US empire giving them all of our money to help kill us all.
The other absurdity of kill switch legislation applied to public released models that do/will have guardrails is pure idiotic theather because while the AI bond villains can retain your data to help train future models, the public releases never get retrained/improved by anything they see.
Model releases are closing in on 1 month cycles. There is fairly low human involvement already, but 1 month release cycles, means throwing away the last expensive training run, with just 1 month of revenue to make up for it. It’s why, there is a perpetual loss in AI labs pursuits. Extremely minimal gains, and potential regressions, from RSI. Its the compute costs not the architecture that makes models expensive.
Extinction is a high bar, but its a quibble, to say the Terminator mass murder world, is not so bad because there were indeed a few survivors leading a resistance. Semantic arguments over “is it real AI” or “extinction” as a defense of AI path, and empire tools to kill everyone not supportive, is shills supporting empire, and mass murder.
Data centers are coal/methane pigs. AI will (help) kill us. Just not in the way that’s being suggested.
Video too long. Is there an AI summary?
Notice how the big AI companies are now in on the ‘scary AI’ bandwagon, just because they see the impending AI bubble cracking, and they need a scapegoat in the form of government regulation to blame, when it eventually cracks.
Anyone remember Max Clifford? He was (is?) a publicist and his modus operandi was to generate infamy. He was hired by Rockstar Games to get “Cop Killer Game” headlines about GTA on the front pages, for example. There’s no such thing as bad press, after all. This whole “Killer AI” routing smacks a lot of that.
I’ve been standing on a soap box on a street corner for fifteen years holding a sign saying “The End Is Nigh” and nobody paid me nuttin’!". /s
Offered money by whom exactly?
1:43
So “an AI advocacy group” and “specifically for this kind of topic”.
The person in the image above reported and repeated the claims about AI’s potential to wipe out humanity without irony or sceptism on a recent video. I used to watch her but found her tangled neverending analogies tiresome… Always something like “XYZ is spending money like an ABC, with an QRS sized hole In the money bucket while DEF does ZZZ to scoop up the dropped pennies… we all know what that is like, don’t we?”.
They want to regulate away their biggest fear: open weights LLMs.
And, as a bonus, draw attention away from how harmfully Big Tech has packaged LLMs for the public. That’s the dangerous part.
That’s all the Terminator meme is. I’m not surprised influencers are being payed, given all the previous astroturfing in this space.
Yup. The problem isn’t the large language models, it’s the business models
Maybe “large business models” would be a better name?
Sabine is an idiot fraud
Thank you, that’s the first thing that came to mind. She’s a horrible person both to listen to as well as in terms of not being an empathetic human being.
She’s no prize to look at either.
Oh, man. Have you ever heard her sing? It’s something else.
Pull your dick off your ear next time you’re speaking
Honestly - that’s low, dude. Don’t diss people’s looks. Weak.
the most important part of her ugly inside is her face true
Your post is a 10 out of 10 on the bullshit meter.
Edit. The bait was taken, t was just a joke people.
She has no credibility.
Claims of Scientific Stagnation: Hossenfelder argues that foundational physics has made no real achievements in 40 years. She labels areas like string theory and supersymmetry as “mathematical fiction” and a waste of taxpayer money.
Accusations Against Academia: She has asserted that a large portion of tax-funded academic research amounts to “nonsense” produced solely to keep professors and institutions funded. (this comes from her failed academic career).
Institutional Fallout: Tensions regarding her sharp rhetoric culminated in public friction, including her departure from the Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy, where she argued that much of modern foundational physics no longer follows the scientific method.
The “Motte-and-Bailey” Approach: Commentators point out that she often uses extreme, provocative statements (“science is dying”) to grab attention, but retreats to milder, defensible observations about administrative publish-or-perish pressures when challenged.
Aiding Science Denial: Science communicators, including Dave Farina (Professor Dave Explains), argue that portraying academia as a corrupt enterprise creates an undercurrent that inadvertently fuels science denialists.
She failed in academics for good reasons.
I feel like her stuff against particle physics academia feels likely true, and the cosmology criticism is just — string theory is not testable, it’s not science
It’s her Motte and Bailey style is what led to me dumping her channel
Yet I see little to no arguments disproving the “accusations” . She on the other hand shown some really juicy mails supporting her claims.
You can’t prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. There is no argument to be done except by Sabine, the one making the claim that science is dying.
O a replying to the whole thread. I have watched a few of her videos but always found them off putting and then https://lemmy.ca/u/SaveTheTuaHawk and https://slrpnk.net/u/ProdigalFrog gave me a blackhole to fall down for a while this morning.
Have you seen this?
I’ve seen the Marxists “debunking” her economics video few years ago. Hours of vids, few minor good points you could fit into 10min of solid criticism and the rest was complete garbage. I haven’t watched this video, but I expect the same.
I know I’m not the only one who has been scratching their head at all the doomsday cries around AI that have suddenly rose up. Especially as it seems as if all those calls are coming from inside the house.
Play on fear hard enough and you have people not worrying about the actual limitations of LLMs. My worry is that they shift the goalposts hard enough that instead of them asking for a bailout, the narrative becomes them being nationalized for our safety with guys like Elon sitting at the head of a new governmental department or something. Government buys all this dead weight of an industry and the tech fascists get a permanent seat at the table.
There is a very interesting upper echelon video with an explanation for the sudden doomsday narrative we are currently being fed.
Basically what they want is regulations that they can write so nobody else can spin up an AI company, or run an independent AI model on their home lab for example. And yes, you can download an llm and run it on a beefy enough computer, independent from any LLM company.
Basically they want laws that develop a Monopoly so we have to rent out AI agents rather than make our own, and have that written down in law.
They also do not want say, smaller companies developing their own AI systems and instead be forced to rent from them.
Are there dangers in AI? Yes very so. Misaligned AI have done things in a lab setting that is concerning, but these regulations are calling for aren’t there to deal with that, it’s to create a monopoly because they realise that everyone from hobbyists to governments can run their own AI system if they can afford to.
They want you to think AI is going to destroy the world so that you forget that the rich are already destroying the world right now
the rich are already destroying the world right now
Which is likely: Climate models and observations match with a current 3 ° C warming path, and 3°C warming would destroy our human civilization, and lot of other living beings. What climate models can’t predict is economic developments and political processes.
It is the “accusation in a mirror” pattern.
Are you incapable of nuance?
What nuance?
ye
Like,… But trickle down economics?
I liked this take: https://pluralistic.net/2026/09/16/beggar-thy-neighbor/
An excerpt:
But what if there was a way for the AI companies to get government permission to violate antitrust law and cease to compete with one another, and secure a ban on the use of Chinese open weight models? Turns out, there is a way to call time on the Red Queen’s Race: merely insist that you are on the verge of teaching so many words to the word-guessing program that it will wake up and devour us all, and call for a ban on “superintelligence”:
Once the government stipulates that “superintelligence risk” is an existential crisis, it must grant the hyperscalers a consent decree absolving them from any violations of antitrust law stemming from a conspiracy to halt direct competition with one another:
https://stephaniekelton.substack.com/p/brer-rabbit-and-ai-extinction
Freaking out about “superintelligence” is a canonical example of “criti-hype,” where critics repeat boosters’ claims but append, “(and that’s bad)” to them:
https://peoples-things.ghost.io/youre-doing-it-wrong-notes-on-criticism-and-technology-hype/
Remember, the tech giants want to stop competing.
The argument is, these companies cant be profitable as long as there is competition (from open or chinese models), so the US companies want those to be banned and be allowed to collude with each other to ramp up the money extraction without fear of consumers moving to other services.
sick of this guy. Fine, the bond villains have a plethora of wish lists. We’re not forced to care about any of their ambitions to prevent AI destruction. They could achieve the same ambitions, by just parrotting NVidia: “No danger. Only cure for cancer. Must beat China, by making AI more expensive everywhere else to stop them from making their own AI”
I’m fond of the conspiracy theory that each of the AI companies has realized that revenues are not growing anywhere near fast enough to justify their spend rate, but none of them is willing to be the first to slow down and risk losing market mind-share. Government decree lets them stop their unsustainable growth without having to tell investors that their whole business model was unsustainable.
Manufacturing consent for a bailout. I’m with you on this one.
Right now in my Lemmy feed there is a post with a screencap from a FOX News segment where the their screen says:
Fear = Control = Power.
Fox would know all about that.
OTOH, this isn’t something we can just ignore either. It’s all marketing hype, until it’s not.
Idk probably the rich want to divide us over another issue so we don’t eat them.
It’s a privacy nightmare, but no no, these killer robots could kill us all with their killing!! Restrict their use to just us, so that the privacy issues are… all ours baby YEAH!!!
I used to follow hossenfelder’s channel on youtube after hearing her on an episode of the Mindscape podcast. It seemed like a good place to get a skeptical point of view on some issues. Over time it became apparent to me that it waa pretty much just skepticism for the sake of skepticism. I don’t know of any actual controversy she is involved in, though some of the other comments here seem to imply there is some, but I definitely didn’t get good vibes.
She started on a sincere goal of knowledge translation, but then she got obsessed with the YouTube algorithm and many of her videos are hot takes she’s not qualified on.
Same here, watched a few of her videos. Was good in the beginning, and I liked her critical stance. But I think she got worse and worse over time, now it’s painful to watch her.
i find it convenient that at the same time that AI cluster supposedly broke out of their “secure” sand box and “hacked” huggingface, “on their own”, as the AI ceo’s all individually wrote a paper about how there should be legislation constricting ai development in very specific yet seemingly the exact same ways, then they all had a meeting to agree on how to lobby the government, at the same time i am getting paid anti ai advertisements and news articles.
They’re all pretending blowfish blowing each other as one big blowfish Ouroboros.
I’m sure all of these restrictions conveniently prevent other companies from developing the same level of AI that OpenAI and Anthropic have because it’s so “dangerous.” Thereby granting them a duopoly. I fully expect that Chinese AI companies are going to be restricted as well for “security reasons.”
Read a short article about a study by Microsoft claiming most people around the world think AI is good enough and restrictions are needed. All of these tech giants are full of it.
Exactly. They have no ‘moat’ in vulture-capital-speak. So they’re now trying to buy one via
lobbyingbribes, legislation to cement their leading position. This is also why they’ve bought up all the RAM and SSD storage for the rest of this decade, to make the next gen of PCs and GPUs unaffordable for everyone else. This is phase two of forcing everyone into the cloud; a war against home computing.Sounds about right
Inb4 “We would have been profitable, but the regulations mean we have to be safe. Sorry investors. The government will bail us out now though because we’re so powerful and dangerous.”
AI-pushers: “The Apocalypse is nigh!” mom, tired: “we have The Apocalypse at home…” The Apocalypse at home: CAPITALISM
Lol, you anti-capitalism people are hilarious.
Is capitalism in the room with us right now? Does it want to drink our bones?
Yes, late stage capitalism in the US and many countries is a problem, but no… It’s not the source of all the problems in the world.
I told this sort of thing under the same category as religion at this point.
haha you are hilarious, is this brain of yours in the room with us right now?
yes late stage brain tumors in sh.itjust.works users and on many other instances is a problem, but no… it’s not the source of all the problems on fedi.
i told this sort of thing under the same category as bigotry at this point.
