Hypothetically you take the leading expert of a field and say "they believe in their own field too much - far more than I do as a layman - and therefore surely must have psychosis."

Why should I trust that your assessment is correct? Is it likely to ever be correct in the case of a doctor/mechanical engineer/athlete/economist/whatever? So why do so many people insist that an incredibly intelligent AI researcher has fallen into some obvious trap?

▲

halfmatthalfcat 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Because we're paying attention? A lot of "smart" people are lost in the AI sauce, grandstanding that they are going to change the very fabric of society. Generally leading experts in other fields are not making the same hyperbolic, self-indulgent, embarrassing statements.

▲

ladberg 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

At risk of being "lost in the AI sauce", do you seriously believe that AI isn't actively changing the fabric of society? Almost feels like we're living in totally different realities if that isn't clear-cut

	▲	halfmatthalfcat 24 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I still put my pants on the same way, eat the same food, talk to my friends and family the same way. I drive to the grocery store, pick out the same food and cook food at the same home. Talk to my kids, take them to activities and watch Bluey. The only time my reality has changed is when I spend time at a computer or on my phone and even then, its a fraction of the total time. So no, it's not a "totally different reality" for me.

▲

MattRix 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Have you considered that maybe the experts in a field are actually correct about that field?

	▲	thin_carapace 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		have you considered that at any second all our existing knowledge could be rendered redundant on the frontier these experts work in?