> t's not about AI's motivation. It's about the people behind the AI programming it. They can make it behave well but at the same time it can turn on a dime. T

> t's not about AI's motivation. It's about the people behind the AI programming it. They can make it behave well but at the same time it can turn on a dime. This is true of any software. > But an AI can just as easily fake it all for a year or two, and then drop it a second later. We are nowhere near an AI being able to "fake" anything. No matter what words are coming out of an LLM. There's no self model -- it's episodic and static. Regarding the Cornell reference and backdoors in AI that is true. But it's also true of compilers. It has nothing to do with an AI having any concept or capacity of "deceipt". We definitely agree that AI should not be trusted, but they are just not currently or in the anywhere close to near future capable of deceipt on their own. At this point that kind of "deceipt" would come from the programmers -- at least until AI is much more advanced than it currently is.