>We don't need a superintelligent AI to cause problems, we just need idiots asking the AI to destroy us. This is where the real danger lies. I see a lot of peo

>We don't need a superintelligent AI to cause problems, we just need idiots asking the AI to destroy us. This is where the real danger lies. I see a lot of people focusing on the argument that it's only trying to predict the next word, but to look at it that way is to treat it as a closed system, which it's not. The interactions it has with us will cause us to change it. When you treat the entire system as not just "LLMs" but "humans interacting with LLMs at scale" then that's when you start to get more complex, emergent behaviour and no one can really claim to know how that system functions end-to-end.