> Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument.

In what way is this random? It's a chronology of the bullshit from the past few years. Also: easy to say in hindsight. The hype was there, and many people believed it. The press, in particular, just lapped up the claims the way a Labrador Retriever gobbles up whatever you put in front of it.

> We have opened up a potential pandoras box without knowing it.

No, we haven't. We have a new type of (I would say, inferential) computation that is truly astonishing because it can convincingly imitate language and, to a certain extent, intentional action. Feel free to read "generate" or whatever instead if you don't like "imitate." It won't wake up and murder you in your bed at night. It won't take over the world. It won't wipe out humanity. It won't fly to Mars and build data centers there. It won't maximize paperclips. It probably won't even take your job away. It has no consciousness. It has no intentions.

And if you look behind the curtain, all you'll see are a few very rich, unscrupulous guys who are stoking the debate with fearmongering because it's strategically advantageous for them to do so. Don't let them take you for a fool. Use GenAI to your advantage while tokens still cost a fraction of what they're actually worth, but ignore all that doomsday nonsense.

Hey, I remember when the Internet was just a bunch of bullshit that was going to go away too.

>It has no consciousness.

Why does it need it?

>It has no intentions.

All it needs is a prompt. Instrumental convergence (and humans hooking them up to everything else) takes care of the rest.

Really you sounds horrifically ignorant of how any evolutionary AI algorithms work and the problems we see come out of them in much simpler models.