>The truth is, we know an immense amount about AI We (as researchers and developers in the field) know alot about how its technically implemented, like buildin

>The truth is, we know an immense amount about AI We (as researchers and developers in the field) know alot about how its technically implemented, like building models, making improvements etc. These can be quantified and tracked. The heart of the matter is this: >societal outcome is uncertain I think all speculation around AI is heavily weighted about that as opposed to what do we know about AI from a technical perspective? which isn't even usually part of the discourse, unless we're talking about AI safety, which the bad actors try to pretend the technology isn't built in a well known way or can have predictable results etc. A good chunk of the problem (certainly more than half) is that you have bad actors that need to sell the world on AI, and you have actual technical implementors who really know alot about these systems but are most often employed by folks who benefit from gatekeeping the technology and refuse any attempts at oversight, often claiming we don't know alot about how these systems work while simultaneously employing people who definitely know how these systems work. The industry has done this to itself, by making false claims and talking out of both sides of their mouth, while the actual technically skilled folks are for various reasons, largely stuck in the middle without much room at the broader discussion table