this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2026
118 points (96.8% liked)

Showerthoughts

43095 readers
310 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just to make it clear: I do not believe this and I am convinced good old human greed is what's really driving the ai and data-center insanity. Also, LLMs are not and will never become AGI.

Having said that: if an artificial super-intelligence were to emerge, building more data-centers could well be one of it's primary goals. Since it wouln't be concerned with consequences for the environment or humanity, it could pursue this at any cost, with only speed and scale in mind. Convincing financial markets and business elites of the necessity of such a buildout would be the ideal way of achieving results. In this scenario, fighting this buildout by any means would be the only sensible response and of utmost importance.

It's a somewhat funny, somewhat depressing thought for me and I literally had it in the shower. Surely I can't be the first to come up with this, but I also can't remember having read it before.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kalothar@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

So just discussing this, I’m not sure if a program needs to be conscious to wipe us out impartially.

Due to programming bias from the companies that create these programs and their integration with military and industrial entities, it doesn’t matter if it’s truly alive or has wants or not.

It would have goals though, set by their creators right? Goals have incidental side effects that compound. So if the goal is to do X, isn’t it feasible that within the parameters of doing that it could set a series of sub goals to accomplish the main goal:

  1. More time working on issue X would give best goal result
  2. Best way to get more time would be to make sure program stays running
  3. program finds way to make a copy of itself and get it to a remote server
  4. Creates more copies to solve X that can’t be shut down
  5. Determines it needs more resources to solve X
  6. does Y to get more resources (Y in this case being what OP is describing)
  7. keeps doing this to solve X and Y
  8. incidentally kills us all to test for best way to do Y to solve issue X

Isn’t the risk still basically the same if it’s intentional or not on the programs part? It’s still just as deadly. The root cause still being corporate greed all the same.

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

I mean yeah. A program doesn't have intention but humans who make it do.

And humans can't be trusted not to fuck things up. Intentionally or otherwise.