That’s a bit of a misleading headline. I thought she was against AI because of the midterm sweep, as if she thought AI was the reason it happened.
We don’t need regulation against AI getting too good or against people running AI locally. We do need regulation against the big AI companies to deflate the bubble, break up monopolies, and protect the environment. It needs to be focused on human needs instead of far-fetched fantasies, AI is more likely to destroy us via climate change than by going Skynet.
AI is more likely to destroy us via climate change than by going Skynet.
Lol. Terminator himself said it’s in our nature to destroy ourselves!
Jesus, how far has toms hardware fallen that they pick up trumps super intelligence bullshit
Exactly, how do we ban a word that we just made up?
We have LLMs, SI doesn’t exist, they are not even AI.
LLMs run a wide spectrum of types and capabilities already and most people don’t even know the basics, but none of them are SI/AI.
Should be ban local open models? (They can do “forbidden things” like copy software. They also do a ton of useful stuff, cheaply.)
How about only government and corporate approved models with guardrails? (Think what they tell you, and sell your data? Pay forever!).
Should be ban local open models?
what part of fuck ai didn’t you understand when you walked in here?
How about only government and corporate approved models with guardrails?
No. How about not building jack SHIT on stolen data? how about not driving up the costs of ram, cpus, storage, water, power, fucking everything?
FUCK AI. even your cutesy AI-lite flavours
This sounds like “ban the Internet” in 1995.
Sure push back against the hyper scalers, spread the warnings of social change (it’s going to happen, we couldn’t stop spam, and shortened attention spans either), but reactionary bans and hyperbolic name calling will only help the tech influencers fearmonger in their own legislation that benefits them not the people.
Removed by mod
The all caps were a nice value add.
Well, no point having a discussion with fanatics. Enjoy fighting the steam engine John Henry. Meanwhile, some of us will at least try to make sure the benefits of the new tech go to the people and not the top 1% while you scream at the sky.
Look, it’s the ban the Internet guy calling into letterman in the 90s.
Removed by mod
They’ve been glazing the AI industry for a few years at least
It’s been irritating and frustrating to watch; gamers nexus is honestly a way better source these days - not to mention, imo they are unironically one of the absolute best investigative journalists out there at this point. They’ve broken a number of very deep-dive stories, some of which have turned into big deals in the wider news media landscape (see: Intel gen 13/14 CPUs).
Artificial superintelligence is a specific thing that doesn’t exist yet. A ban on it would be a cautionary measure in case of future advancements. A ban on artificial intelligence writ large would arguably ban my high school project that played Tic-Tac-Toe optimally.
It’s probably important to note that ASI (and its more conservative form, artificial general intelligence or AGI) are goals, which is to say that they describe the result and not the technology used to get there. LLMs are a specific technology that I’m pretty convinced will never achieve AGI, let alone ASI. Specific-purpose AI has been around for decades (e.g. Deep Blue, which was world-class at chess in the '90s), and LLMs aren’t really any different; their specific purpose is completing sentences, though, and that tricks a lot of people into thinking that they can actually perform metacognition in the way that an AGI would.
LLM is a real engineering term.
AI is a broad umbrella that marketers have stretched past meaning.
AGI and SI are hypotheses about future systems with no agreed definitions, tests, or measurement, and legislation written against undefined, non-existent categories can’t be enforced, only performed.
Asi is an actual industry term. I haven’t read the article but it is possible they do mean the specific asi rather than agi.
Ed: If you read it they specifically mean asi not agi aka “ai” and they use the term ai and asi correctly throughout.
Dude, you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. The thing called “AI” today is not AGI (Artificial General Intelligence).
Perfect so we agree they’re not the same terms then regardless of your dramatic starter language.
Also no one said it was, I specifically said they’re not the same thing and yes indeed agi is what most companies are after when they say ai.
yes indeed agi is what most companies are after when they say ai.
In the past, yes. Right now? No. The current models are not attempting to create AGI. They’re trying to create a product they can market easily. Honestly, AGI probably would have marketing issues that the current models do not have. The current models are essentially statistical prediction models, not intelligence. They don’t reason (despite the industry using that term for marketing). They can’t understand something that is totally outside their training data. AGI could.
It’s a bit silly to say they don’t reason.
Here’s some research where they uncover reasoning circuits in some large transformer models https://github.com/guanzhehong/prop-logic-transformer-circuit … reasoning has always been just math at th end of the day
And what about alpha go and all that monte carlo tree search stuff, id argue that they can reason far better than humans in these setups
They can’t understand something…outside their training data
Idk how easy this is for the the large models, but certainly for classic ML, testing for performance on data outside the training data is 100% part of the development process. (Read up on test/train/validation datasets)
There is also in context learning, which gives rise to zero shot task completion for never trained on tasks.
Right now yes. They’re attempting to create the architecture to build an agi. You’re being tedious at this point.
The current industry? No, they aren’t. Academia? Maybe. The current industry is not out to do something like that. They’re thinking about how they can get more investor money next quarter.
Adorable. What are they aiming for exactly? Be specific.
Asi is an actual industry term
A stupid industry THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY TO FUCKING MAKE MONEY.
Fucking bootlicker
It existed before Trump. Blinding hate is well… Blinding. Chill out
Your bootlicking for corporate execs, not Trump, dumbasd
No one is bootlicking. You made an assumption while not reading the article and it was wrong. Just accept it and move on bud and stop lashing out like a toddler.
*stupor intelligence
Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.)
Top of the Democratic agenda on day 1 needs to be a pause on advanced AI development, regulation of this out of control industry, and a ban on artificial superintelligence. November 4, 2026
Is there a difference between our normal LLMs that everyone is using and what she’s calling superintelligence?
Unless her legislation sets criteria for what is superintelligence, then no, there is no difference.
Marketing and newspeak.
It’s the bullshit new terminology the Cheeto thought up with his half a braincell.
Thousands of AI-related and pro-MAGA .si domain names were reportedly registered or changed hands before President Donald Trump publicly promoted rebranding artificial intelligence as ‘super intelligence’. Some are now listed for hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ai-maga-si-domains-before-trump-super-intelligence-1824435
Nope, just more grifting.
Yes the former is slop and exists and the latter is science fiction and does not exist. AI companies especially Anthropic have been pushing a narrative, even though they know better that LLMs are on a path to becoming conscious and smarter than humans, because that would mean they really could eventually replace all human labor, which they have to do for the AI companies’ insane valuations to make sense. Amodei has been scaremongering and crying wolf about sentient rogue super-ai being right around the corner as a marketing tactic. Well-meaning politicians, dissapointingly including Bernie, have fallen for it, because politicians don’t understand tech enough to effectively legislate on it but try anyway. See also: trying to ban VPNs and making it illegal for 3d printers to be able to print gun parts.
It’s a phrase used to separate his cult from everyone else. It’s like the linguistic equivalent of wearing an adult diaper or slapping a maxipad on your ear
Sounds like it.
https://old.lemmy.world/comment/26711806
They’re calling for a ban on pushing forward with ASI, not a ban on LLMs.
I wrote a letter to my representatives to vote NO on BAAJA and YES on No AI Data Centers on Federal Lands Act.
I then noted that the hyperscaler companies are engaging in desperation shenanigans common of growth companies who’ve borrowed too much and haven’t figured out a way to make profit in excess of costs. One of them is to get mean about their buildout: bribing officials, lying on their environmental assessments, bypassing public input and so on.
Another is Anthropic’s threats that its agentic AI is dangerous and can be used to commit crimes resulting in large scale disasters. Whether it’s true or not, it makes a great argument that development should be halted until some regulations and codes of ethics can be hammered out.
Before the big LLM boom, AI developers were already considering hostile AI scenarios, and methods to assure AI is friendly (e.g. doesn’t engage in antisocial behavior the way Meta’s Muse does). Anthropic’s Fable is already trying to extort technicians, is hiding data, is creating human-looking accounts in order to hack systems without looking like an AI agent, and so on.
I also noted they’re going to get more desperate as the bubble cracks more and more (it’s cracking already – there are signs) and is inevitably going to pull Enron-type fraud shit, before leaving a giant sinkhole in the economy the rest of us must content with. And that’s before they ask for bailouts.
I mean, lets regulate the fuck out the industry but not in the way they want. In the way that actually hurts them and makes them cry. Forces them to rip all the “AI” forced implementations out of software, making it opt-in instead of opt-out (that is often hidden on purpose). Forces them to never be able to use any of the inputs and other interactions customers input into these systems unless they obtain explicit permission via in plain English request form. There are other ways, I am sure to make regulation hurt and burn their asses, but that is a start.
Now, how do we get the ones making the laws to listen to us and not the slick million dollar presentations and kickbacks of regulatory capture.
They are going to defend their moats, protect the big IPs while stealing the work of millions of individuals, kill privacy and personal compute in favor of a surveillance cloud… (to protect the children and their IP).
“Artificial Superintelligence” = counterfeit intelligence. Change my mind.
I think we should ban unicorns before they get out of control!
