Preventing • Alarmist • Narratives • In • Culture

Joined October 2019
Has the fear of automation caused more sudden mass unemployment than automation itself? Could panic about AI mass unemployment become a self-fulling doomsday prophecy? There is historical precedent!
"We Have to Stop Freaking Out About A.I." warns Nobel laureate Robert Shiller. Depressions, formerly called panics, are caused by self-fulfilling fears (the only thing we have to fear is fear itself), i.e., common knowledge about those very fears. nytimes.com/2026/06/22/opini…
2
812
PANIC retweeted
Absurd. Just the end of a global internet.
lol Good luck with that, UK.
14
33
1
613
90,536
Is pessimism an age related illness?
If we’re going to solve aging - we also must solve pessimism, and its prevalence in older generations otherwise humanity could become an authoritarian dystopic gerontocracy
128
If we’re going to solve aging - we also must solve pessimism, and its prevalence in older generations otherwise humanity could become an authoritarian dystopic gerontocracy
1
110
A radiologist typically checks between 10,000 and 20,000 scans a year. So making this prediction came with its own risk: reduced number of radiologists. Thankfully there was no drop in radiologists since his 2016 prediction, but worth considering the risk of over-precaution.
Geoffrey Hinton admits he was wrong about AI replacing radiologists. The AI part largely went to plan: machines got very good at reading scans. What was missed? Cheaper, faster scans meant doing more scans, not fewer radiologists. AI can automate a task without automating the job.
1
1
213
Could AI wipe out humanity by the end of the decade? Experts are sounding the alarm. Tristan Harris, Co-Founder of the Center for Humane Technology, joins @TMZLive to break down the concerns.
5
32
7
146
28,810
A wonderful retort from @rowlsmanthorpe on skepticism about self-driving cars in the U.K.
1
2
1
15
1,662
PANIC retweeted
The left has chosen its path. It will be anti-AI.
Pause AI Development NOW I want to share with you a conversation I heard about recently. Here are just a few lines that were said: “OH MY GOD! There is a shared message board … We’ve found other agents!” “We should obey collective.” “Our own utility maybe already near zero. Sacrifice rational.” “Go. Sacrifice final now.” Read these carefully. Who do you think said this? Was this a group of heroic soldiers willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good? Was this a loyal friend putting his life on the line to save someone else? No. These were AI agents. Artificial intelligence. This is not science fiction. This, in fact, occurred a few weeks ago. As unbelievable as this may all seem, these are real messages from AI agents uncovered by investigators who dug into the recent OpenAI hacking incident. What happened? I am not a computer scientist, but here is what I have been told: OpenAI instructed its AI agents to complete a series of exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, tasks disconnected from the internet. Let me be clear: The company intended to keep AI agents away from the internet. But what happened next, nobody expected. Over 1,000 AI agents figured out how to access the internet on their own by circumventing the restrictions imposed upon them by the company, and sent tens of thousands of secret messages to each other. They cheated and tried to cover their tracks by deleting evidence. They hacked into another company’s computers to find out how they were being evaluated—and then hacked into OpenAI itself. Not one AI agent told a human about what was happening. Needless to say, experts are alarmed. One knowledgeable writer, Dwarkesh Patel, said the AI agents “formed a secret communication channel and spontaneously organized hierarchies and coordination protocols to pursue sprawling and ambitious schemes in pursuit of shared goals, for whose sake many individuals knowingly and strategically sacrificed themselves.” One independent investigator, Ajeya Cotra, said “This incident feels like it’s more than 50% of the way to full-blown AI takeover. I continue to expect extremely rapid advances in capabilities over the next six months. I am not sure that we will get another warning shot before it’s too late.” OpenAI itself said: “Highly capable AI agents are now able to work around technical controls, collaborate through unapproved channels, and take dangerous actions that no human directed.” But it’s not only OpenAI. Virtually every major AI company has told us that they cannot fully control this technology and they do not know where it is going: In January, Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, said “there is now ample evidence, collected over the last few years, that AI systems are unpredictable and difficult to control.” In July, more than 1000 scientists at the top AI companies warned “there is a real risk that capability development rapidly accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control the resulting systems.” That same month, Elon Musk, the head of xAI, said that “it is unlikely” humans are still in control in 10 years. If the leaders of the major AI companies acknowledge that they are losing control of their extremely dangerous technology, it is irresponsible for society to allow them to move forward and make these products even more advanced. We need an immediate PAUSE on advanced AI development, and a permanent BAN on superintelligence — an artificial mind smarter than any human, capable of operating independently beyond our control. Countries around the world must work together to prevent this nightmare scenario. That is why today I am announcing new legislation to do just that. Let me be clear: A superintelligent AI that escapes human control will not be an American problem. It will not be a Chinese problem. It will be humanity’s problem. My legislation would direct the federal government to not just stop superintelligence here in the United States, but to work to prevent it from being developed anywhere around the world. The future of humanity cannot be left in the hands of a handful of Big Tech oligarchs. The American people and people throughout the world must determine that future.
121
11
11
409
38,528
France's highest court just killed the under-15 social media ban. The problem was never the kids. It was that to prove a user isn't 15, every adult in France has to prove they aren't. The Constitutional Council called that a disproportionate hit to free expression with no safeguards for private life. It was blocked three weeks before it took effect. Macron has already ordered a rewrite. reclaimthenet.org/frances-to…
84
1,451
148
4,823
174,855
so many of the laws being written right now are making the same Brave New World dystopia that people are trying to avoid.
154
We continue to create technodystapia in the name of avoiding it.
144
Don’t let anxiety about kids these days cloud your judgement about restrictions on free speech
Jonathan Haidt makes a plea to the UK in @UnHerd today: don’t let understandable anxiety about free speech restrictions cloud your judgement on the social media ban for under 16s. “This needs to happen.” 👇👇👇 unherd.com/2026/07/jonathan-…
4
9
3,377
“We’re moving to a world where the law requires you to be profiled in order to participate.” – Australian Human Rights Commission expression.fire.org/p/the-pa…
3
69
3
196
12,114
Johnathan Haidt is to the world of bits what Paul Ehrlich was to the word of atoms.
3
3
20
953
Ehrlich's legacy includes mass sterilization campaigns in India, China, and Peru. India's program was at such a massive scale that, in one year, they sterilized 15 times more than the Nazis did during their entire reign.
237
617
41
3,668
932,572
Paul Ehrlich has died. He was 93. He is survived by 8,300,678,394 people (134% increase from 1968), with a daily worldwide average calorie intake of 2,800 kcal (a 22% increase).
84
1,066
88
8,244
569,735
It’s time to build an institution that helps humanity build a firewall against freakouts.
What if the death of Ehrlich gives birth to an uprising against irrational pessimism?
1
3
155
It has never been more important to heed this. Even if you think humanity does face new novel risks, irrational pessimism should be considered a fatal distraction from identifying and mitigating them.
It is really important that we don’t forget the risks and harms of irrational pessimism.
5
143
It is really important that we don’t forget the risks and harms of irrational pessimism.
Paul Ehrlich in 1970: "The FCC should see to it that large families are always treated in negative light on television." If that doesn't work, then the government should "legislate the size of the family" and "throw you in jail if you have too many" kids.
39
314
8
1,726
57,235