Outsideobsserver

Karma: 40

Outsideobsserver 6 Aug 2025 15:25 UTC
3 points
1
on: Outsideobsserver’s Shortform
Epistemic status: Hot take, do not expect many or any to agree with me but it’s something that has been ruminating with me recently and I am curious for discussion.
Many technofurturists/optimist are are highly divocred front the genuine sentiment and societal understanding of technology’s use for the layperson. Many of the people do not wish to have ultra high tech, ai powered appliances like washer/dryers, fridges, TVs etc. in nearly every aspect of our lives. While tech will and has accelerate humans advancement (and more swiftly heighten existential risk), the perverse nature of tech CEOs, billionaires and to a lesser extent politicians through their lobbies/think tanks precludes them from actually understanding the needs of the masses. Many great things could be done with the tools available to us now, including narrow, hyper specific AI models, but the Molochian nature of capitalism and profit chasing mentalities will either lead to civilizational collapse or extinction.

Outsideobsserver 8 Jul 2025 19:19 UTC
5 points
0
in reply to: J Bostock’s comment on: A case for courage, when speaking of AI danger
Hi there!
I apologize for not responding to this very insightful comment, I really appreciate your perspective on my admittedly scatter brained thought parent comment. Your comment definitely has caused me to reflect a-bit on my own, and updated me away slightly from my original position.
I feel I may have been a bit ignorant to the actual state of PauseAI, as like I said in my original comments and replies it felt like an organization dangerously close to becoming orphaned from people’s thought processes. I’m glad to hear there are some ways around the issue I described. Maybe write a top level post about how this shift in understanding is benefiting your messaging to the general public? It may inform others of novel ways to spread a positive movement.

Outsideobsserver 30 Jun 2025 14:14 UTC
6 points
0
in reply to: Haiku’s comment on: A case for courage, when speaking of AI danger
I appreciate your comment, and the work that the individuals of both organizations are attempting to do now, but I can’t help but feel my point was slightly missed.
It’s not that I wouldn’t support these organizations, or even the majority of laypersons would, it’s more simply that there’s a fatigue that comes with the style of protest and outreach these organizations do. There’s only so many dire warnings, so many pickett lines, so many cold calls and outreach before your target audiences becomes either overwhelmed and spirals in to a bout of severe depressions and anxiety (as I have many of times), or over saturated and dismissive since they see it as yet another failed dream of the naive. Unfortunately, years upon years of protest and subsequent media portrayal of protests have supplied people with a bitter pill of indifference and massaged the thoughts of people who could do things into cynical skeptics.
If one wants the Overton window to swing to in a way that could archive meaningful change, the masses must have both hope and direction in which to change things while also striking a delicate balance of being grounded while anticipating greater risks. If you lead with “hey there’s a reasonable chance that this hyper intelligent software will have the ability to completely dismantle the planet into atoms in a microscopic timescale, so we need to stop it now and then point humanity into manifest destiny into the cosmos as the rightful stewards of the stars” people will blankly stare at you with bewilderment. But if you instead start by addressing things like job risks, deepfakes, concentration of power and the totalitarianism, tangible real issues people can see now, they may begin to open that door and then be more susceptible to discussing and acting on existential risk because they have the momentum behind them.

Any movement, grassroots or grand, needs to have the momentum to slog through the doubts and denial, and I feel like if just a few minor sparks like wind could lead to a cascade of positive change. You have to push your victories just as if not higher (within reason as to avoid false hope) than you beat the drum of doom. But again, I’m not an expert. I’m just a kid who is scared and spent time dialoging with people with a drive to create a better future. Please keep fighting the good fight, please keep raging against the coming dark.

Outsideobsserver 28 Jun 2025 0:48 UTC
30 points
5
on: A case for courage, when speaking of AI danger
Hi there,
I just made an account to offer my anecdotes as an outside observer. I admit, I’m not well versed in the of AI, I’m only a college graduate with a focus on biomedicine. But as a person who found his way to this site following the 2023 letter about AI extinction, I’ve nearly constantly read as much information as I could process to understand the state and stakes of the AI Risk conversation. For what it’s worth, I applaud those who have the courage to speak about something that in the grand scheme of things is hard to discuss with people without sounding condescending, apathetic or crazy. For someone like me, who has trouble with expressing the blood chilling dread I feel reading AI related headlines, I have nothing but the upmost respect for those who may have an influence in guiding this timeline in to one that succeeds.

I just feel like the communication form well informed people gets marred buy the sense of incapabilty. What I mean by that is the average layperson will engage with a meme or a light post about the risks of AI, but then swiftly become disillusioned by the prosepect of not being able to influence anything. (An aside, this is essentially the same situation I felt trying to communicate risks of pandemics and safe health practices) Decades of protests for various causes rarely amount to meaningful changes, and the causes often change and get drowned out but yet another cause to rally behind. Congress is too caught up in culture wars and polarization to be even remotely effective, and the administration seems hellbent on accelerating to the very cliff we should be avoiding. The bills that could’ve have the smallest of teeth get lobbied into being no more than a slap in the wrist. I worry that AI risk, while being probably the single most important issue of this decade, drowns in the pits of disillusionment because the layperson can’t meaningfully change it. They feel, and I feel we are passengers on a ride that the ones in “control” see us as acceptable casualties.
I also feel as if many of the “good” outcomes may come off as extremely uncomfortable and possibly dystopian. People care about the essence of humanity, the art, the music, the emotions both good and bad. The trajectory we are on now feels like the culmination of valuing extreme profit over the essence of humanity (see the copious amounts of people who post about dreaming about running way to nature and escaping a “capitalist nightmare” People are also selfish at best, and selfless for maybe 20 people on a good day in my experience, so it’s much easier to fret about where the next paycheck is going to go, over how AI will happen. They can accept the inevitability of extinction by AI if we fail to align it, but it falls into the same indifference as know the invitablity of death baring any sci-fi tech.

What can be done about this? Honestly I don’t know. For those who are fighting the good fight, have heart and have courage, but also have compassion and empathy for your fellow man. More than likely they are just as worried and scared. Try not to give false hope, but use the wins that you do have on the off chance to fuel momentum. Strike the balance between humility and assertiveness so that people look to you all as the experts you are. I wish those luck.