this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2025
23 points (87.1% liked)

SneerClub

1209 readers
12 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

See our twin at Reddit

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
blakestacey@awful.systems
dgerard@awful.systems
self@awful.systems
23
Your favorite science YouTubers are misleading you about AI — how to spot lies (www.youtube.com)
submitted 3 days ago by corbin@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A straightforward dismantling of AI fearmongering videos uploaded by Kyle "Science Thor" Hill, Sci "The Fault in our Research" Show, and Kurz "We're Sorry for Summarizing a Pop-Sci Book" Gesagt over the past few months. The author is a computer professional but their take is fully in line with what we normally post here.

I don't have any choice sneers. The author is too busy hunting for whoever is paying SciShow and Kurzgesagt for these videos. I do appreciate that they repeatedly point out that there is allegedly a lot of evidence of people harming themselves or others because of chatbots. Allegedly.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] corbin@awful.systems 16 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The author also proposes a framework for analyzing claims about generative AI. I don't know if I endorse it fully, but I agree that each of the four talking points represents a massive failure of understanding. Their LIES model is:

  • Lethality: the bots will kill us all
  • Inevitability: the bots are unstoppable and will definitely be created in the future
  • Exceptionalism: the bots are wholly unlike any past technology and we are unprepared to understand them
  • Superintelligent: the bots are better than people at thinking

I would add to this a Plausibility or Personhood or Personality: the incorrect claim that the bots are people. Maybe call it PILES.

[–] YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Call the last one A for Agency and turn the acronym into an AI history reference: ELISA.

[–] swlabr@awful.systems 8 points 2 days ago

Hey while we’re here, I propose two more letters:

S, standing for “stochastic parrot ignorance,”

C, standing for “Chinese room does not constitute thought,”

Now we can have ASS LICE