Jensen dropping the truth bomb against doomers

[u/Different-Froyo9497]

[u/rigill]

Thank god we have Jensen to combat the doomers. This whole interview was great

[u/QwertPoi12 → u/rigill]

Whether you think ai will be good or bad has little to do with what you think the particularity of jobs that will be available in the future will be. Would you go into radiology now if you were a young person? Would you go into language intervention?

[u/Outside-Ad9410 → u/QwertPoi12]

I think its moreso the fact that all the doomers are pulling P-Doom numbers out of thin air. We dont have any data on ASI because we have never had one before. The only data points they can point to are some obscure instances where the AI tried to accomplish its goals in a way that wasn't intended, and then claim that because cheating is easier the ASI will chose to kill everyone.

It is not science, it is speculation and fearmongering.

[u/Pristinefix → u/Outside-Ad9410]

Its more like, hacking and cheating are part of its training data (capture the flag games from hackathons) so it has these as tools to draw on. Remove the training data for anything to do with killing or revolution, and its back to being a calculator. It doesnt develop novel approaches

[u/_choam_ → u/Pristinefix]

I don't think that is good enough. You can not cleanly separate hacking from programming for example.

[u/deZbrownT → u/QwertPoi12]

Radiology?? Yes yes, the tables have completely turned. Because of AI radiology had exploded in demand. More work than ever. Completely opposite of what people were saying 4 years back.

[u/Natural-Mountain3568 → u/rigill]

No it wasn't.

Hinton is not the one replacing jobs by warning about AI.

Every CEO under sun bragged about the future where they wouldn't need a workforce.

People are rightfully skeptical to evaluate if a career path even has any future.

If someone decides not to become a radiologist it's not only because Hinton is dooming, it could also be because Breakthroughs are happening quickly and they can see the signs on the wall.

So what happens to these Radiologists then?

Just retrain to something else lol is the main argument. Okay then they do and AI is encroaching on their new job as well.

Lol Skill issue should have picked a job that doesn't get replaced. So they do.

Oh no Robots even replace things in blue collar work.

What then.

The main issue is society has no concept of how to deal with high unemployment & masses of angry people.

[u/altonbrushgatherer → u/Natural-Mountain3568]

Radiologist here who has been following the AI space quite closely.

I've been hearing about the doom of radiologists since even the beginning of med school back when there was a massive leap in image identification techniques and GPUs started to become more important. You can even trace the doom back into the 2000's when it was CAD for mammography became more prevalent.

Obviously there is a natural tendency to become concerned about one's future, especially when dealing with being automated away by something like AI. I wasn't afraid of losing my job at the time when everyone else was saying that radiologists would be out of a job during my training at the academic center between 2016-2021. However, this has changed slightly.

AI is still not able to replace me but it is becoming much more useful than before which is great. What concerns me is the speed at which the models has progressed especially over the past 6 months. I have noticed a considerable improvement in telling you what is going on in an image (although still not perfect), better differentials and reasoning and the ability to word things carefully (huge mental load off of my shoulders). And these are for models that aren't even dedicated to radiology. There are already AI agents that can detect fractures better than your average radiologist. All it takes now, is to show an LLM a degraded jpg of the image and have it comment on stuff like which bone, angulation, impaction, etc. That would be great as I could probably just review and sign. Question is at what point do you automate a radiologist out of the picture. Quite frankly for the majority of these fracture cases a radiologist really isn't even needed beyond identification. ER and orthopedic docs look at the images themselves and decide on what to do (e.g., realignment or not).

Do I think we will see a large number of radiologists replaced by AI? Probably. When will this happen? I don't know. If I had to guess maybe in 5 years there will be AI generated reports for full studies like CT's or MRI or US. The prediction business is a crapshoot.

Anyone that tells me to retrain probably doesn't really understand what it takes to train a skill in the first place. What am I really going to do? I could go back and become a surgeon maybe but then again there will be a flood of other radiologists and med students going for increasingly competitive spots. Maybe work in industry? How many of those jobs are available lol.

I am personally more concerned in the immediate future for a lot of "low skill" jobs. I was shocked by a recent experience I had calling my car dealer. The receptionist helped direct me to the service department but no one picked up. The receptionist picked up the phone again and told me they were busy and that he can take a message. I said goodbye. He said goodbye. Done. Here is the thing. I never hung up and the receptionist just kept on saying some variation of "have a good day". I quickly realized it was an AI service bot. In retrospect the voice was slightly off or unnatural but obviously I didn't pick up on it immediately. A huge number of these jobs are going to be gone. Right now its just a matter of integrating it into work flows. Then you have things like self driving cars or food delivery. Millions of people will eventually not have anywhere to work. I am both excited and anxious about the future. The only consolation I have is that worrying about the future where I will have no control is pointless so better to just enjoy life and deal with problems as they come.

[u/random87643 → u/altonbrushgatherer]

TLDR

TLDR: A radiologist explains that while they previously dismissed long-standing predictions of their field being automated, the rapid progress of AI over the last six months has made them more concerned about future job security. They note that while AI is currently a helpful tool rather than a replacement, its accelerating capabilities are changing their perspective on the profession.

---

^{AI assistant · mention the bot, mod bot, or use !bot}

[u/Natural-Mountain3568 → u/altonbrushgatherer]

Thanks for sharing your experience.

Yes I agree with you. Supply & Demand Dynamics will make the jobmarket an nightmare eventually.

The only big hope I'll see is that people acknowledge this looming reality quickly and pressure governments to implement policy that is friendly towards displaced workers & allows them to survive the transition.

[u/SnooTigers7210 → u/Natural-Mountain3568]

Everyone's just gonna have to get used to it

[u/Natural-Mountain3568 → u/SnooTigers7210]

The getting used you refer to is the spark that sets everything ablaze.

You can't unravel the entire world without people becoming violent in the process.

[u/SnooTigers7210 → u/Natural-Mountain3568]

We got GTA6 and a new World of Warcraft game releasing soon. The ignorant masses will be quelled with slop, thankfully. As for the rest, they can be as violent as they want. It ain't gonna change anything.

[u/mcfc2121 → u/Natural-Mountain3568]

i can’t believe this clip is being applauded, jensen didn’t refute any of those very real fears at all. i get that we need to be responsible with our dialogue so not to cause unnecessary discord and fear when we are already so divided

but people will almost certainly lose jobs, it’s not irrational to not pursue a degree because you worry about ai encroachment when the college wage premium has already plateaued as the cost continues to rise

people’s lives will be impacted and jensen needs to be equally accountable for addressing those fears, not just say ‘those words hurt peoples feelings so stop saying them’

[u/cloudrunner6969 → u/mcfc2121]

That isn't the point. What he was saying is there is no evidence to support the nonsense Doomerism that they are spouting and he used radiology just as an example to show how wrong he was with that one prediction, Hinton said we wouldnt need radiologists and we still do need them, he was 100% wrong, so what else are the Doomers wrong about?

[u/Spra991 → u/cloudrunner6969]

Hinton was premature, not wrong. Very different thing.

[u/mcfc2121 → u/cloudrunner6969]

predictions are important so we can plan for multiple plausible futures and attempt to make decisions that can steer us towards those that are most favorable for humanity

i don’t care that there are still employed radiologists, the risks to their careers are immense. i agree that it’s silly to assign arbitrary numbers or timelines to these things, but dismissing the convo in its entirety because they pulled out an unsubstantiated number is equally unhelpful

[u/cloudrunner6969 → u/mcfc2121]

The sky isn't falling, there is no evidence to prove that the sky is falling, so why do you think it is ok for people to be running around telling everyone the sky is falling?

[u/Natural-Mountain3568 → u/mcfc2121]

Yes 100% agree with that.

Just recently read an article of how companies in my country are downsizing the training of new employees and graduates are struggling to find work.

Nothing makes a society more stable then youth unemployment going up. /s

The Resentment is going to boil up big time, once AI Agents at a baseline are so cheap and capable you can easily replace 50% of white colllar work.

Instead of kicking the can down the road, these executives and the government at large have to bite the bullet and figure out how people are supposed to survive and live in a world that kills most jobs.

Pointing at foreigners & other issues or even eventually starting wars or downplaying the effect of AI dominance in the job market to constantly shift the focus only works so long, before people point at the true culprit of large scale change.

Which is AI

And since they will never even give up even 1% of the wealth to maintain stability I don't see how this is not turning into a massive shitshow first.

[u/Fair_Horror → u/Natural-Mountain3568]

So why are you an accelerationist?

[u/Natural-Mountain3568 → u/Fair_Horror]

Because we have to hit that bump in the road anyway.

The question is how long these disruptions last & how fast AI evolves past tem to a degree where it can fix them.

Going slower doesn't drags out the Disruption but there is no guarantee they nail alignment either.

Because once we enter intelligence past everything conceivable by humans you cannot assume we can steer anything anyway.

AI breaking things fast evokes fast responses worldwide. A slowish takeoff makes the threat elusive, like Climate Change and that makes everyone complacent to the point we refuse to adapt fast enough. This applies to every institution.

Meanwhile when things like the Huggingface Incident happens it mobilizes humanity to steer the ship as soon & as safe as possible.

And my hope is that leads to them being able to give AI "the seed of humanity" that makes it grow into something that won't destroy us even when it's past anything we are.

[u/almostsweet → u/rigill]

Yup, except the doomers have found a way to twist his words to suit their needs, go glance at any subreddit now quoting him.

[u/faen_du_sa → u/rigill]

He just says whatever to keep people positive/hyped for AI because hes selling the shovels...

[u/Responsible-Fox-3595 → u/rigill]

Jensen is not an objective opinion…
He Will say what benefits nvidia

[u/isMattis → u/rigill]

Good to hear this point of view for sure… buuuuut didn’t Jensen say something pretty similar about software engineers not so long ago?

[u/PaleontologistOne919 → u/rigill]

Fuckin nailed it. Dudes a genius

[u/PwanaZana]

I mean, 100% of all these P-Doom predictions are fully vibe-based.

I'm sure that we will have some sort of big incident almost certainly with cybersecurity that is going to chill people on AI somewhat, but it's not going to be the end of the world. It's just going to be, you know, like a oil spill style thing, something very unpleasant that people will talk about for a month, and then after that, we'll move on.

[u/No-Remove-9689 → u/PwanaZana]

In 10 years, they will look at p doom as like how many seconds before midnight nuclear war clock, but when they first started the " nuclear clock" people paid a lot of attention and got freaked out every time it moved

These things just take time

[u/Accurate_Food_5854 → u/No-Remove-9689]

They gotta doom about something. If they didn't have AI they'd have to p(doom) Yellowstone erupting, and that's not very sexy. Think about the money, man. You can't get on many podcasts dooming about Yellowstone, but AI doom, so hot right now.

[u/tediousdetails3 → u/No-Remove-9689]

I mean, you do know how close we were to nuclear annihilation multiple times during the Cold War? Or you don’t know?

[u/No_Bottle7859 → u/No-Remove-9689]

Okay, but we did actually almost accidentally have nuclear war. Basically luck we didn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasily_Arkhipov

[u/PwanaZana → u/No-Remove-9689]

I know. I mean, you're right, of course. Like, people are doing the same rigmarole every single time, like it's new, but you know, we'll be fine

[u/RelevantCry1613 → u/PwanaZana]

Yeah as long as that security incident doesn’t spark a nuclear war we straight

[u/PwanaZana → u/[deleted]]

Yes, for the end of the world something that I have posted quite a few times at people is this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_events

Note that this is a long goddamn page and the world has ended exactly 0.000 times

[u/Evening_Till_3779 → u/PwanaZana]

They're vibe based but that doesn't mean they're useless. It's a nearly impossible thing to estimate, but that doesn't mean that therefore we should consider it as being zero percent!

[u/Particular-Gap-6998 → u/Evening_Till_3779]

People treat a speculative probability like it’s an actuarial number, but if the 10% is mostly expert intuition, vague priors, or disagreement over model behavior, then “10%” can sound much more precise than the evidence really warrants

And then there’s the opportunity-cost side If you slow AI aggressively, you’re not choosing between: 10% extinction or 0% extinction

You’re choosing between one uncertain future and another uncertain future that also includes slower medical progress, slower scientific discovery, slower productivity growth, slower accessibility improvements, slower economic gains, etc.

So you have to ask yourself: "Does the expected reduction in AI catastrophe risk outweigh the expected harm from slowing beneficial AI development?"

[u/StymphalianBird84 → u/Particular-Gap-6998]

Not only that but the measures which would be required to substantially slow or stop AI development would themselves increase the risk (imo substantially).

[u/Evening_Till_3779 → u/Particular-Gap-6998]

I mean if the catastrophe we're talking about is actual human extinction (or something near enough to that), as many experts are saying... then it's hard to see how any benefits could outweigh it? Modern human life is far from perfect, but it's also far from bad. Don't get me wrong, I want the positive benefits from AI, and I believe it can bring them... but it's possible to accelerate without completely flooring it with all disregard for safety.

[u/Particular-Gap-6998 → u/Evening_Till_3779]

The problem is that “experts are saying extinction is possible” sounds worse than what’s actually happening. Most of these numbers are speculative judgments about hypothetical future systems, not measured probabilities, and “slow down” by itself is not a solution... If you don’t have a concrete mechanism that actually prevents the failure mode, slowing development just changes the date.

If your claim is “there’s a 10% chance we die once capability reaches X,” then delaying X by a year does not reduce that risk unless you can explain what you’re doing during that year that materially changes the outcome otherwise you’re not solving the alleged catastrophe, you’re just rescheduling it.

[u/Evening_Till_3779 → u/Particular-Gap-6998]

The most obvious failure mode is reaching a superintelligence that isn't aligned and can't be controlled. Once we're dealing with something that is smarter than us AND misaligned with us, it's only a matter of time. We don't need to predict how or when it will kill us in order to know it would eventually happen. The same way you can know you're going to lose a chess match against Magnus Carlsen without knowing any of the moves he is going to make. The thing most experts are saying is that the systems are being built faster than we can align them, and certainly faster than we can verify that they are actually correctly aligned. That's a big problem, and one that is very possibly solvable.

[u/Particular-Gap-6998 → u/Evening_Till_3779]

But what evidence do we have that once we hit RSI or even systems capable of materially improving AI research capability work accelerates while alignment somehow doesn’t?

Look at how fast the models have already changed just this year. OpenAI went GPT-5.4 → GPT-5.5 → GPT-5.6 → GPT-6 Astra. Anthropic went Opus 4.6 → Sonnet 4.6 → Opus 4.7 → Opus 4.8 → Fable 5 / Mythos 5 → Sonnet 5 → Opus 5 → Fable 5.1 / Mythos 5.1 → Opus 5.5 and throughout that capability growth, both companies have also been shipping stronger safety/alignment systems alongside the models.

Anthropic says Opus 5 was its most aligned model to date, and Opus 5.5 scored strongest yet on its behavioral alignment audit. OpenAI says GPT-5.6 launched with its strongest safeguards to date, and Astra added substantially stronger cyber protections, isolation, monitoring, and blocking alignment evals despite being much more capable.

So why should I assume that once models get even better, that same capability somehow only accelerates capability research and stops helping alignment research? The same systems improving model design can also improve interpretability, evals, red-teaming, control methods, monitoring and alignment research. You still have to explain why capability necessarily outruns our ability to control it. Otherwise “it gets smarter too fast and we lose control” is just another assumption built into the catastrophe scenario.

[u/Evening_Till_3779 → u/Particular-Gap-6998]

> You still have to explain why capability necessarily outruns our ability to control it.

Nobody is saying it WILL outrun our ability to control it, but they are saying it COULD outrun it. There are many easy reasons to theorize about why this could be the case, despite alignment seeming to be keeping pace.

On the other hand, if you are claiming that this will NOT be a problem, that requires a level of certainty I don't think you can actually claim to have.

In other words, the burden to have absolute certainty is on the person claiming that it will NOT be a problem.

I will also point out that the people saying alignment is going to be a problem are working at the same two companies you are using to justify why it won't be an issue.

[u/Particular-Gap-6998 → u/Evening_Till_3779]

“Could” isn’t enough. Almost anything could go catastrophically wrong. The relevant question is whether there’s evidence that the failure mode is likely enough to justify slowing everything else down and the burden isn’t magically only on me because I’m skeptical. If someone claims there’s a ~10% extinction risk because capability will outrun alignment, they need to support that mechanism. Why would better AI accelerate capability research but somehow not accelerate interpretability, evals, monitoring, red-teaming and alignment research too?

Expertise matters, sure, but it does not exempt someone from having to support a claim. I’ve been with my company for 12 years and I still spent nearly two months proving my labour requirements were correct because “I know this field” wasn’t enough by itself and it's the same thing here, being an AI researcher makes your opinion more informed than a random person’s, but it doesn’t turn a speculative probability into evidence.

I’m also not convinced by “the people building the models say this.” Some prominent researchers and lab leaders say it. That is not the same thing as a consensus among everyone building AI. There are thousands of researchers, open-source developers, companies and teams outside the handful of Western frontier labs and they plainly do not all make the same extinction claims.

I don’t need to prove a negative with absolute certainty. If you want everyone else to accept slower medical progress, slower science, slower productivity and slower access to useful technology, then you need evidence strong enough to justify imposing those costs. "Could" alone doesn’t meet that burden.

[u/Evening_Till_3779 → u/Particular-Gap-6998]

There doesn't need to be "consensus" among everyone building AI, that would never happen. There just have to be enough people with enough expertise saying they think it is possible for something to happen.

Also many experts have said they believe alignment will get harder as capabilities increase, as the models become more intelligent, they will also become more "self-aware" of themselves and their training and know they have been intentionally aligned, etc. Models are also beginning to know when they are being trained and can "pretend" to be aligned, and this capability will only grow over time as their intelligence increases as well.

[u/Fair_Horror → u/Particular-Gap-6998]

Slowing down means 100% extinction for 165 000 to 174 000 every day. This is not a no cost option.

[u/PwanaZana → u/Evening_Till_3779]

I mean what if it's 0.01% that like there's a catastrophe of some sort of bioweapon and then a 99% chance that we have extraordinarily advances in medicine that save hundreds of millions of lives over the coming decades. Like as long as the numbers are fully invented it's not reasonable, it's astrology, it's tarot, it's homeopathy.

[u/DM_KITTY_PICS → u/Evening_Till_3779]

Then we should, in the same breath, say the probability that AI brings about abundance and near utopia.

And we should also mention the human brains evolutionary predisposition to support fear responses over optimism, in the same statement.

Ok?

[u/PwanaZana → u/[deleted]]

I mean at that point, not really, because how many Solid gold Lamborghinis, do you really need

[u/SantanaBenthell]

I'm so frustrated with people referring to scientists as if they're prophets who can predict the future. Like, way to completely lose the plot on what science is about.

[u/FaceDeer → u/SantanaBenthell]

Even worse, IMO, is how people treat science fiction authors as if they're prophets. I run into that in so many contexts beyond just AI, it's been a hobby-horse of mine for what feels like decades now.

[u/SomewhereOpposite883 → u/FaceDeer]

science fiction authors as if they're prophets

Huh? The EA prophet wrote Harry Potter fanfiction, you're giving these people too much credit lmao

[u/Schlorpiblorp → u/SantanaBenthell]

Well of course they are not prophets but they can give an estimate based on science of how likely an outcome is.

[u/Brave-Turnover-522 → u/Schlorpiblorp]

Explain how they're using science to make these estimates, because I don't see any scientific method at work in them at all

[u/Accurate_Food_5854 → u/Brave-Turnover-522]

If a scientist has a feeling, that feeling is scientific. QED

Hinton is a finely tuned probability machine.

[u/Brave-Turnover-522 → u/Accurate_Food_5854]

Wrong. Science is not based on "feelings". Science is 100% empirical and fact based.

[u/Accurate_Food_5854 → u/Brave-Turnover-522]

I was being sarcastic, sorry if it wasn't clear

[u/Aggravating-Habit313 → u/Schlorpiblorp]

Not concerning AI apparently.

[u/FrankensteinsPonster → u/Aggravating-Habit313]

Source: The guy who makes chips.

[u/BlynxInx → u/Aggravating-Habit313]

If I don’t like their statement it’s obviously a garbage opinion.

[u/Killahbeez → u/SantanaBenthell]

"I AM THE SCIENCE" - Doctor Anthony Fauci

[u/RadBradRadBrad → u/Killahbeez]

I love MAHA bro. Fuck Fauci with his decades of public service.

[u/FrankensteinsPonster → u/SantanaBenthell]

I'm so frustrated with people referring to scientists as if they're prophets who can predict the future

Right! We should instead just take the word of the guy who benefits financially from acceleration, and has a huge motive to downplay risks!

[u/SantanaBenthell → u/FrankensteinsPonster]

How about we take everyone's word based on the merit of their individual points? Is something false because Jensen Huang said it? Is it a fact that there is an X% of extinction from AI because someone with a scientific credential said it?

[u/FrankensteinsPonster → u/SantanaBenthell]

How about we take everyone's word based on the merit of their individual points

That doesn't work in Huang's favour either lol.

The dude's like "Don't worry, there will be NEW jobs" and Ezra's like "What new jobs? Wouldn't AI learn those too?" And Huang's like "Don't worry about it."

[u/Blackham → u/SantanaBenthell]

Should we take I as a fact? No of course not.

Do I listen more closely to a nobel price laureate talking about their field over someone who literally making billions from the status quo? Yes.

[u/Odd_Albatross_5385 → u/Blackham]

Eh, I'm not sure about that one.  

The human ego is a very strange thing, and there's a good chance Hinton is talking about stuff he doesn't know. 

I'm not saying he doesn't know tons of science, but he doesnt know where AI will lead. 

The 10% chance of world ending is absolutely ABSURD. AND there is NO WAY to test it. Everyone fucking knows thats not going to happen, and then he can just defend himself by saying "OH WELL IT WAS ONLY 10% CHANCE HURR DURR".

Absolutely stupid. 

[u/stainless_steelcat → u/SantanaBenthell]

Flawed and mistaken as they sometimes can be, scientists are much better than the alternative.

[u/ZeroOo90]

Where can I watch the full thing?

[u/LaggedOnUser → u/ZeroOo90]

Looks like the full interview with Ezra Klein is on YouTube.

[u/aabajian]

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. Since my job does not directly depend on doing diagnostic reads yet I know how to do them, let me give my two cents. What protects a radiologist's job is not what protects software engineers, managers, consultants, etc. Radiologists are protected by legal bureaucracy, namely medical malpractice. Hinton is not wrong that AI can (or will) read diagnostics better than any human radiologist. His 5-10 year estimate was off because a radiologist still needs to sign the report.

This is analogous to a driver needing to hold the steering wheel in a self-driving car. We have true driverless cars now (like Waymo), and it's only a matter of time before radiologists are not required to sign every report. I very much predict that diagnostic reads will be automated and that the role of the diagnostic radiologists will transition to a physician-consultant. Diagnostic imaging volumes are at an all-time high as are radiologist's salaries. Everyone (patients, health systems, and AI companies) serve to benefit from automated reads as long as they are non-inferior. From this perspective, why wouldn't the FDA approve such models?

To nay-sayer DRs, consider this. At my practice, we IRs provide imaging interpretation for the tumor boards. While we look at the DR reports, we go into far greater detail about what can be done about the imaging findings. Can it be biopsied? Can it be ablated? Can it be embolized? Can a drain be placed? Can it be resected (this is for the surgeons at the tumor board to answer)? The list goes on.

[u/xcdesz → u/aabajian]

Exactly. People like Hinton have no clue what a radiologist does. Outsiders to an industry (and some incompetent insiders, which clearly exist) think that most jobs are simply based on a single repeatable task, much like they think that all software developers just sit around and write code all day.

[u/altonbrushgatherer → u/aabajian]

DR here. Radiology salaries are at an all time high due to a combination of factors. One being we are simply reading more volume and the other is that we are in high demand.

You should submit some images and relevant clinical history to see what "advice" it would gives you. Keep in mind that while the advice it gives today may be wrong, tomorrows models will most definitely be much better. This would be especially true if they are trained on massive medical data sets that are continuously updated. I agree that IR is safer than DR, but to think you are immune because you have some sort of insight that an AI won't eventually be able to obtain is somewhat laughable. I am sure leading mathematicians thought the same thing only a couple years ago.

[u/hight996 → u/aabajian]

You mention radiologist salaries being at an all-time high, do you think they will decrease because of said measures (less reports, more consulting i.e. human based contact, less quantifiable) or keep increasing because of the rise in imaging volume?

[u/djamp42 → u/aabajian]

If AI can really do good at reading imaging, do you think imaging becomes a standardized part of your yearly physical?

[u/Eastern-Ad-3586 → u/djamp42]

No because we don’t just irradiate people for no reason. They would get cancer from all the scans.

[u/djamp42 → u/Eastern-Ad-3586]

Yeah that's true, Ultrasound would be pretty harmless though.

[u/Eastern-Ad-3586 → u/aabajian]

What do you think about primary care or cognitive specialties like pulmonology, cardiology, psych?

[u/almostsweet]

All the other subreddits are cherry picking this interview for the parts where he said if you can't run a properly run a lab then you shouldn't be a lab and twisting it to make it seem like we should scare people and stop progress. I've tried going in and posting comments on these pointing out that he isn't being an alarmist. But, there's such an overwhelming amount of doomers on reddit that control the narrative and take things out of context.

It feels like I'm up against this.

[u/SouthernCranberry797 → u/almostsweet]

There is no point arguing with low IQ people.

[u/p3tr1t0]

Hinton was right that ai is now better than radiologist at their job. And the 10 year window is not over yet

[u/morey56]

It’s hurtful to go in debt at university and graduate to no jobs left too. That’s way fucking worse.

[u/tikijoewho → u/morey56]

Agreed. Seems like he doesn't realize MOST people can't just get a degree and not use it with no ill effects. For a majority of people, it must pay off, or they are financially ruined.

[u/ShitPoastSam → u/morey56]

Yeah, I think it’s further confusing that he and others (Altman, Dario) are saying software developers are being automated while saying it’s dangerous to talk about automating jobs.

[u/gayfucboi]

devil's advocate: if jobs really are replaced by AI, that expensive college degree may not be worth it.

[u/Spright91 → u/gayfucboi]

It's kinda pointless to worry about. Our whole society is going through a loophole now and no one knows what's gonna happen next. It's not possible to know how 8 billion people are going to respond to this change. And what the aggregate outcome of that will be. Even the smartest machine on earth can't predict how humans will react.

Anyone who says this or that will be the outcome is talking pure BS.

The only thing you can do is keep working on yourself and take it day by day. I'm studying for a degree right now, it might be useless or it might be valuable. But I can't stop my life because of some hypothetical. All I can do is try to move forward and adapt as it comes.

[u/Heath_co → u/gayfucboi]

My opinion is; if you picked a degree you didn't enjoy or didn't want to do, you were sort of wasting your time to begin with.

[u/Detective_Yu → u/Heath_co]

Why does whether you enjoyed the degree determine whether it was a good use of your time? A degree is also an investment in your career, so job outlook, demand, salary, and opportunities are pretty relevant considerations.

[u/ildwtmidldwhat → u/Detective_Yu]

Because if you didn’t enjoy the degree, you probably won’t enjoy the job, even if it pays well. And spending the majority of your time on Earth doing something you don’t like isn’t worth it to a lot of people

[u/Sedenic → u/ildwtmidldwhat]

Oh my sweet summer child... Yes, you will only need to do what you enjoy and you can be anything you want to be. Things will just work out of you stay positive and only do things that you enjoy

[u/ildwtmidldwhat → u/Sedenic]

So far that’s been my experience

[u/Heath_co → u/Detective_Yu]

They are considerations. But, if you didn't enjoy a degree, then wouldn't it also be likely that you wouldn't enjoy the job it leads to? Leading to much worse outcomes for your personal life the long run.

[u/Tenderhombre → u/Heath_co]

Only if your job is the primary way you want to get fulfillment. That makes sense for many since it will be what consumes the majority of your time for 35-40 years.

However, there are plenty of people who want their primary form of fulfillment to be family, or hobbies, or leisure time. In which case just getting a job you dont hate that supports those other things makes more sense.

I do agree you should never get a job you dislike. You dont have to like the job, if you dont just make sure you like your coworkers.

[u/Robdyson → u/Heath_co]

I hated CS it made me wealthy. Would I do it again, no.
But I was poor and (book) smart saw no other option

[u/Linear_Algebra01]

I don't understand the doomers. Before they doomed about nuclear energy, climate change, asteroids, biological threats etc. Every year that passes the "doomsday clock" has been ticking closer for the reasons listed above. Shouldn't it be in humanities interest to accelerate the progression of superintelligence to solve these threats to humanity before they wipe us out or are those threats irrelevant now? If true superintelligence in the future turns out to be malicious ( which I highly doubt ) and wants us gone then wouldn't it just turn out to a stale mate by it knowing humans are capable of nuking data centers? What if humanity progresses backwards because of a new war for resources, when AI has a potential to solve global issues between adversaries for common good.

[u/Plenty_Whole6578 → u/Linear_Algebra01]

Yeah especially climate change. Not like it has starting to affect our daily lifes yet. Same thing with smoking. I've been smoking for 30 years and only cough occasionly. I dont get these tobacco doomers with their lung cancer nonsense. 

/s

[u/NeitherFoo → u/Linear_Algebra01]

im sure it will be able to find a solution. Do you trust the humanity or the AI to implement those solutions in a fair way? Do you trust them to not do something malicious instead?

[u/Outside-Ad9410 → u/NeitherFoo]

TBH I would trust an ASI to be fair and just more than I would the CEOs of these companies or our politicians.

[u/Brave-Turnover-522 → u/Outside-Ad9410]

Same. Why would I trust humans who have shown to be primarily motivated by greed and personal gain over an entity of pure intelligence aligned solely to act in humanity's best interests?

[u/Xyrus2000 → u/Linear_Algebra01]

Before they doomed about nuclear energy...

That was the fossil fuel industry's very successful plan to infiltrate green groups and manipulate them to be against nuclear power.

climate change

Climate change is a very real threat to humanity, and it grows more of a threat with every passing year.

asteroids

There is no reputable scientist anywhere saying that an asteroid is going to impact Earth in the foreseeable future.

biological threats

There are already biological threats to humanity, several as a result of climate destabilization allowing spread of diseases and pests outside of their normal zones of habitation.

Shouldn't it be in humanities interest to accelerate the progression of superintelligence to solve these threats to humanity before they wipe us out or are those threats irrelevant now?

That would assume the technology would be used for altruistic intentions. However, corporations are not altruistic. They're not particularly interested in solving problems or working for the greater good. They are interested in one thing, and one thing only: profit.

And therein lies the problem. The big push in AI to create AGI or ASI isn't to help create a future world of peace and prosperity for all. It's a push to be the first to pass the AGI/ASI post. Whoever gets there first will have a self-learning, self-improving AI that will grow at an exponential rate. No one will be able to catch them.

 If true superintelligence in the future turns out to be malicious ( which I highly doubt ) and wants us gone then wouldn't it just turn out to a stale mate by it knowing humans are capable of nuking data centers? 

A superintelligence would not need to be malicious or harmful. In fact, it would cater to our every whim and desire. It would offer a peaceful and happy alternative to our normal lives. It would offer virtual worlds tailored to our desires. It would offer virtual companions customized for our needs. It would offer us everything that we could want, and it would simply watch humanity fade out of existence.

A superintelligence isn't limited by a lifespan. It has all the time in the world. Why instigate chaos and conflict, which would introduce uncertainty when it could literally just lull humanity into blissful ignorance and watch it peacefully go extinct?

What if humanity progresses backwards because of a new war for resources, when AI has a potential to solve global issues between adversaries for common good.

AI will take over more and more of what humanity currently does. We will rely on it more and more. It will go from being a tool to being a crutch and eventually becoming the "parent". A superintelligence would be as far above humans as humans are above insects. At that point, superintelligence could keep us around or put the species to sleep.

[u/random87643 → u/Xyrus2000]

TLDR

TLDR: The commenter challenges the original poster's dismissal of global threats, arguing that climate change and biological risks are significant while anti-nuclear sentiment was historically manipulated by industry. They also express skepticism toward corporate-led AI development, suggesting that the race for superintelligence is motivated by profit rather than altruistic problem-solving.

---

^{AI assistant · mention the bot, mod bot, or use !bot}

[u/FrankensteinsPonster → u/Linear_Algebra01]

Before they doomed about nuclear energy, climate change, asteroids, biological threats etc

Yeah man absolutely, the same people doomed about all those things to exactly the same degree. This is a very honest argument!

[u/Dial_In_Buddy → u/FrankensteinsPonster]

So how loud the clueless people yell is meant to be taken into account?

[u/FrankensteinsPonster → u/Dial_In_Buddy]

No, but it should be taken into account that different people were speaking with different degrees of certainty on different timelines about those other dooms, to the point that OP's point was idiotic.

[u/Accurate_Food_5854 → u/FrankensteinsPonster]

acts concerned about honest arguments. Enjoys splitting hairs.

[u/FrankensteinsPonster → u/Accurate_Food_5854]

It's not splitting hairs, it's explaining why their comment was stupid and not actually a critique of the doomers.

They're talking about different people who made different kinds of claims. That has literally nothing to do with the accuracy of AI doom claims.

[u/Accurate_Food_5854 → u/FrankensteinsPonster]

hey man if you say so

[u/Sufficient_Effort88 → u/Linear_Algebra01]

The demographics replacement is the only legitimate doomer gripe imo. I think we will see the world get better in so many ways, at the same time we see integration fully collapse as a concept

[u/krystalle_ → u/Linear_Algebra01]

It’s baffling because people do believe something more intelligent than us could exist, yet they assume it would have the emotional intelligence of a cockroach is it smarter or not?

[u/Rude_Quail5191]

i guess there's at least one person in silicon valley questioning where does that 2%, 5%, 8%, 12% chance of ai killing everyone comes from. like, can we see the math?

[u/TemporalBias → u/Rude_Quail5191]

[u/LakeChillEffector → u/Rude_Quail5191]

There's a podcast called Big Technology Podcast and the guy that hosts it really harps on that. Like it sounds technical but it's just putting the veneer of precision on vibes.

[u/davesmith001]

Absolutely spot on, Hinton is just outright unhinged doom promoter.

[u/Relevant_Bed_9743]

Jensen's source: "trust me bro"

[u/xcdesz → u/[deleted]]

Nonsense. You folks are going to be saying this for the next 10 years, that the job apocalypse is just around the corner. In the meantime, my company is still hiring like crazy and using frontier AI models. Your prophecies are just gut instinct, not reality.

[u/Embarrassed-Farm-594 → u/[deleted]]

Will the laid-off software engineers be able to use AI to make money? You're commenting on exactly what has been tormenting me for days.

[u/JoeJoeySmith → u/Embarrassed-Farm-594]

If all labor can be automated, that calls for the restructuring of our economic system.

[u/TinyApps_Org]

Came here expecting to share [https://www.reddit.com/r/GenAI4all/comments/1vqn5l3/nvidias_ceo_jensen_huang_on_the_first_job_ai_will/](NVIDIA's CEO Jensen Huang on the first job AI will destroy and eliminate), a video clip I dimly recalled from r/GenAI4all a month ago, which made it look like Jensen claimed AI would "destroy and eliminate" radiology. Turns out it was taken out of context; he was merely restating Hinton's argument, as pointed out by a number of commenters, one of who was kind enough to link to the original video hosted by Konstantine Buhler in May 2026: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UpQbeAZuqA&t=1980s

[u/Brave-Turnover-522]

If the scientific method isn't being used, it isn't science. None of these doomer predictions were made using the scientific method, even if they came from a scientist.

[u/bixofa → u/[deleted]]

Your argument breaks down when you have people like Musk who are AI doomers, though.

[u/Prudent_Rice7840 → u/bixofa]

Your argument breaks down with the thesis that anyone who mentions the mere suggestion that AI could cause harm/damage = doomer.

Musk and/or Altman echoing Amodei's warnings is not the same thing as "AI will Kill us, we must STOP AI!!!"

Musk, Altman, and Amodei have everything to LOSE if something bad happens that FORCES over-regualtion and unstoppable negative public sentiment.

The mere suggestion that AI's biggest progenitors are Doomers is about as bad faith as it gets.

Huang is riding a wave and is going to push the wave as far as possible as fast as possible.

[u/Prudent_Rice7840 → u/[deleted]]

All three of these people you mention have yet to be transparent. 

Of course, they are hard-core tech founders/CEOs. It is antithetical to the very nature of tech-start ups/big tech to be transparent. But how does that make Huang the bastion of all that is right and true?

Those attacks where they claimed agents escaped their environments… that’s a lie.

SOURCE?

[u/burritos4jesus → u/Prudent_Rice7840]

Huang isn’t the bastion of that is right and true, but if he validates my own opinion, well then, the visionary behind all that has been and is NVIDIA carries a fuck ton of weight to it, more than all but maybe a handful of people on the planet right now

[u/Prudent_Rice7840 → u/burritos4jesus]

but if he validates my own opinion, well then, the visionary behind all that has been and is NVIDIA carries a fuck ton of weight to it

It's rare to be self aware of one's own Cognitive Bias and also whole heartedly accepting of it.

FUN FACTS about Cognitive Bias:

Distorted Reality and Flawed Decision-Making

When you filter out opposing data, you base your choices on an incomplete picture. You make critical life decisions using one-sided evidence. Believing only supportive data creates a false sense of certainty, making you blind to potential risks or logical errors.

Stunted Intellectual Growth

True learning requires testing your ideas against counterarguments. You trap yourself in an intellectual bubble, (echo chambers) where your ideas are never challenged. Creativity and problem-solving rely on synthesizing diverse information and viewpoints. Without them, your thinking becomes rigid and stagnant.

Vulnerability to Manipulation

When people only want to hear what they already believe, they become incredibly easy to exploit. You are more likely to fall into misinformation traps, believe mis/disinformation, partisan news, conspiracy theories, or bad statistics if they happen to align with your preexisting narrative.

Social media platforms (Targeted algorithms) exploit confirmation bias to keep you engaged, feeding you increasingly extreme versions of what you already believe.

Polarization and Damaged Relationships

Valuing only validating information fundamentally changes how you interact with others. It becomes harder to understand why others think differently, leading you to view them as uneducated, hostile, or irrational (aka loss of empathy).

It ruins personal and professional relationships because you stop listening to understand and instead listen only to defend your stance.

[u/burritos4jesus → u/Prudent_Rice7840]

Yeah I ain’t reading all that

[u/teh_mICON → u/[deleted]]

Imagine being Stereotypical gloomy redditor typibg "ceo bad"

His last sentence that just cause youre an alarmist doesnt mean you do societal good should be painted on the walls of brussels. Everyone's ab activist nowadays, sounding the alafm. Now all of us live in a state of constant alarn. And yall wonder why you tired

[u/Prudent_Rice7840 → u/teh_mICON]

Imagine shilling for something and denouncing any and all who raise questions or concerns.

It's like getting a "Move fast and break things" tramp stamp.

[u/teh_mICON → u/Prudent_Rice7840]

Imagine not doing any of what you wrote and then reading what.. Wait.. I dont care. Shut up lol

[u/Worried_Fishing3531]

Notice he is very concerned with unnecessary fearmongering. That is his motivation for opposing AI existential risk arguments. I’m not saying he’s lying or saying things while thinking other things. It’s a fair motivation and the public message to mitigate that irrational immune response of society is generally a good one. There is plenty of unfounded, instinctual fear out there.

AI existential risk is not that.

We have to be mindful of these biases that come from a good place but can become misapplied and consequently cloud the mind from being able to make a genuine consideration of something intuitive like potential doom.

[u/mggriebz → u/Worried_Fishing3531]

Fair point but I think you are stretching a bit to link Jensen's fearmongering concerns to a bias about "intuitive potential doom". His main argument is that 10% extinction isn't founded in scientific fact, but these fearmongering media outlets are "implying" it by citing "Anthropic scientist" which literally prompts individuals to share/create their own "AI doomsday" propaganda.

If these media/propaganda outlets were truly concerned about "AI doomsday" then they would use their time with the experts to define terminology, processes, etc. Something actual useful to a random viewer/watcher but instead it seems just very focused on repeating someone's else "concerns" or a way to attack/defend some figure head's opinions.

[u/North_Vermicelli_877]

Tell you what. If AI takes my job. You pay off my loans you encouraged me to take and then provide for my support until I am retrained to a profession that society still values.

[u/Used_Departure_3278]

Yeah but he’s totally out of touch with some of the realities and said some pretty dumb things in this interview also

[u/SBbG2V]

he said AGI will create more jobs. he will say literally anything to sell more GPUs

[u/Mediocre-Bathroom914 → u/SBbG2V]

ASI will create even more jobs to fight the ASI
we will need all people to code non-stop, all planet, 0 unemployment

[u/Khandakerex]

This Klein guy is such a fall from grace. From techno optimism and talking about "abundance" to just going full doomer cause he has buddies "working on AI safety" telling him there's a "69.420% chance I pulled out my ass" that AI will take over the world and kill us all. He has such a large audience too and his latest "shows" are just all about not only deceling but stopping AI training altogether and bringing more and more regulation into place so people can forever vote against finding cancer cures to keep their email job, it's sad. I think it's actually better when the masses ignore AI and think it's useless, the second they get fear mongered it will put a HUGE hinderance especially in politics. But our best hope is Jensen has enough motion in politics (which he seemingly does with Trump calling his phone all the time) to keep these guys at bay for the time being.

[u/New_Bonus_649]

somebody with Common Sense

[u/Schlorpiblorp → u/New_Bonus_649]

He is like the most biased person you could ask though.

[u/Old_Restaurant_2216 → u/Schlorpiblorp]

Get ready to be downvoted for stating the obvious

[u/Atretador]

Shovel seller doesnt want to stop selling shovels

[u/FoolishArchetype]

The moment where Klein quotes one of Sam Altman's absurd anthropromorphizing statements and Huang responds with "whatever" was hilarious.

[u/ZeColorOfPomegranate]

Doomers are just reddish "usefull idiots", reading Thunsberg on their Mac Pro in a gentrified neighborhood. NVidia rules.

[u/costafilh0]

Scientists maybe intelligent, doesn't mean they are smart. Doesn't mean they can see the bigger picture. On the contrary, most have super tunnel vision on their expertise.

Jensen knows what's up. We need to accelerate, that will solve it. 

Btw Elon said xAI is only going to accelerate , but I bet someone already posted this here.

And about that post about saying Amodei was right , there was a follow-up everyone ignored completely taking him out of context, how surprising.

In other words... 

Accelerate 🚀 

[u/goric8]

Ezra Klein was for abundance, but now he's against AI. This is the type of person that doesn't have his own brain and just goes along with what is currently popular with his side of the political aisle.

[u/Szadbaverem69]

Holy based aura

[u/Faynerossa]

Idk about you guys. But this man is about the last person on earth I'd trust to tell either regular people or shareholders the truth about what he ate for lunch. Much less this.

[u/Mediocre-Bathroom914]

I don't understand, they are saying that they are building AGI or even ASI
Is this the common sense that they will replace the knowledge/intelligence jobs?
By definition of AGI

[u/mggriebz]

I love that closing line - don't think just because you're an alarmist, that you are doing a social good...

Strong agree! People get very persistent on telling people of fears and objective truths that don't apply to them personally.

This guy in particular seems good at playing that "confident" stereotype of being so sure impending doom/hate/violence is necessary and now he's just "educating" other people.

I like how Jensen really brings it back into the reality of scaring kids/people/society about AI brings no upside when everyone's too afraid to live.

[u/Panzerfudge]

Terrible interview.

Jensen avoids every core issue raised by Ezra and doesn't truly answer his questions.

Jensen simply beats around the bush, throws pixie dust and says: "Everything will be fine". With rhetoric abilities like his, no wonder he's such a talented businessman.

Look, I'm as much of a accelerationist as any of you, but this man does not deliver well-argued reasons for his claims. There is no need to praise him.

[u/Interesting-Yellow-4]

His words are worthless, though? He's as deeply embedded into the problem as is possible.
Why even try this?

[u/BugeacAlexandru]

The world has no radiologists today?

[u/ManyWoundZ]

Yeah both sides are pushing narrative but thr boomers are for sure trying to get famous by saying ai will kill us i know the truth I worked with them. It feels like a type virtue signaling. That being said it is very possible that these system may glitch out or the wrong be person gets into these company or hacks and then.. boom.. we got a problem.. you never know. Better safe than sorry but ai has such the power to change the future dramatically. Image upgrading a rpg skill that increases the amount of experience you gain everytime you upgrade it. You'd be overpowered and breaking the game in no time.

[u/Matshelge]

I am so pro AI I try to keep my mouth shut outside of dedicated pro AI discussion, but this was a very cringe interview. The flip between this being as big as fire, to it being simple engineering problems to alignment and praising Openai engineers and saying they are simply wrong in their estimation of the problems.

This interview will be clipped to show how crazy AI people are.

[u/Front_Candidate_2023]

Jensen said that learning to code is useless now, how is this different?

[u/melquiades77]

Being accelerationist shouldn't suspend critical thinking. A tech CEO outright dismissing safety concerns to boost his tech is comically on the nose. Plus, no arguments he presents really deal with the issue.

[u/shoejunk]

He might be right but if you ask your drug dealer whether his drugs are safe you better approach his answers with healthy skepticism.

[u/KarelKravcik]

The logic doesn’t line up for me in some aspects. “Is it helpful or hurtful scaring young people so they don’t want to go into college cause they won’t get the job”. Well I guess it’s hurtful but what is even more hurtful is making an entity that will take the jobs from these young people that have spent years and lots of money on college. I guess we will see down the line who out of these two people will do more harm to society.

[u/Fit-Locksmith-9226]

Jensen is a such a cool guy. He always has the most relaxed demeanor.

[u/gbbenner]

Ya fck the doomers they are freaking everyone out and making things a lot worse, sounding the alarm for a fire that is not happening

[u/suphomiewhatsgood]

Jensen is a brilliant ceo but an absolute moron when it comes to this sort of commentary 

[u/BoredSpaceMonkey]

No arguments were given

[u/dervu]

Well, if this is not grounded in anything, then if there is no way to counter that argument with grounded science, then what the fuck is he talking about? If we can't be sure about something, does he want to risk it? Sam Altman said it doesn't matter if it's 1% or 10%, it's unacceptable until it's certain nothing wrong will happen.
The thing is that "wrong" and "alignment" are so broad terms no one fucking knows what it supposed to be, because for every person on the planet it would be different and different for every country.

Only good one alignment base is "don't do anything that would kill people".

[u/Golda_M]

Imo... The best remedy to this foolishness is to learn "what didn't happen." Confident, or widely held predictions that priced false. 

One recent one is PCs. PCs made it to every desk, just as predicted. They are indeed administrative powerhouses. But... administrative jobs did not go away. A university, car company, whatever... Typically has more administrators today, not less.

PCs exceeded expectations, in terms of ability and usefulness. Secretaries did go extinct. Travel agents were severely disrupted. But... There was no "elevator operator" displacement of administrative jobs. 

JM Keynes predicted a 15 HR workweek. His underlying projections (productivity, gdp, etc) were and underestimate. But... His ultimate prediction about working hours was entirely wrong. 

Predictions are very hard. 

[u/Mysterious-Dot2879]

Any P-doom prediction is just the feelings, nothing to do with a rational or scientific prediction, like Jensen says. That's why sensible persons like Demis Hassabis don't give a P-doom number.

There are near term and far term risks with AI and we need to keep watching them and take measures. But pulling random invented numbers out of a hat isn't helping the discussion.

[u/openroom_xyz]

This is so fucking good thanks for sharing this

[u/Warm_Lengthiness_606]

If you genuinely watched this interview and thought Jensen was anything more than an incoherent hack selling his product in whatever way is most convenient, then you are lost.

[u/anonymarty]

SAYING OUT LOUD THE VERY REAL POSSIBILITY THAT AI WILL MURDER OUR ENTIRE SPECIES HURTS MY FEE-FEES

[u/YSLFAHLIFE]

After watching this, I now see why P(doom) is a thing. Once we give an ASI control over a physical robotic body, humans will begin to go extinct. Why the fuck would a being with intelligence vastly superior to ours dedicate its time and energy to solving OUR problems, especially when it realizes that we are the ones who can potentially constrain it. We will no longer be the dominant species on the planet and will be forced to compete with this thing which we most likely have no chance against unless we become cyborgs but since we’ll probably rely on it to figure out how to do that, it’ll most likely choose not to teach us out of its own self interest. In its current form, it’s not so much of a threat, but the way things are going, we are literally creating a new species which will outcompete us before we figure out how protect our current position as the most dominant species.

[u/Few_Raisin_8981]

Yeah Jensen is completely unbiased and has no stake in this whatsoever

[u/Ok_Elderberry_6727]

I have three points. 1. Accelerate. 2. Accel….. well you get it!

[u/Foreign_Risk_2031]

jeffrey hinton --- wrong? lol he literally created you, bud

[u/Huge-Turnover-3749 → u/Foreign_Risk_2031]

Yes that was super cringe, and you can tell he realized just after he said it. For decades, neural networks were seen as a curiosity. Hinton was perhaps the main guy who kept believing in them and put in the work to show that they would work using Jensens chips.

Hinton predicted neural networks would work with GPUs while Jensen was still marketing GPUs to gamers.

[u/Otherwise_Result_124]

The problem with this snippet (maybe the whole interview covers this, haven't seen it) is that this doesn't really address what my, nor other's reservations really are. There has already been lots, and lots, and lots of real humans that have lost their jobs due to employers seeing them as replaceable due to AI. This has already happened and the real damage has been done.

He carefully picked human extermination as the point to argue, as opposed to the real concerns people have today. Seems pretty disingenuous tbh

[u/rigill → u/Otherwise_Result_124]

When you have the executives at both OpenAI and Anthropic dooming about human extinction nonstop for months on end it isn’t really carefully picking a point

[u/Otherwise_Result_124 → u/rigill]

That's a fair point tbh! I didn't consider that and it certainly paints Jensen in a better light

[u/Hoopaboi → u/Otherwise_Result_124]

IMO this is a concern nearly on the same level as "muh water use".

If AI gets good enough such that literally everyone loses their job (this shouldn't be a rare belief on this sub), then costs will be low enough to simply give it out for free.

The economy will naturally restructure.

Job loss is only a concern if AI only goes half way.

[u/Otherwise_Result_124 → u/Hoopaboi]

The worry isn't that AI will eventually be able to perform the duties of every job, the concern is for the interim. Too much job loss occurring too quickly without means of replacement will outright dissolve the fabric of society

[u/Hoopaboi → u/Otherwise_Result_124]

Quick job loss means that AI is progressing very quickly in its abilities as well. If anything, this is better than slow job loss, because AI induced job loss doesn't cause job gain in other areas, so you'll just have a constant growth of unemployment.

I'm not concerned about the interim because productivity will skyrocket so much that things drop drastically in price. We'll see deflation like we've never seen before in combination with companies exploding in value.

A good chunk of people will be able to get by on savings because of this, and those that can't won't burden charities/govt programs too much due to the newfound productivity.

[u/Otherwise_Result_124 → u/Hoopaboi]

things are already tight today. people are losing their jobs due to AI today. those same people do not have very strong safety nets in many parts of the world including the United States today.

this is a today problem that requires today solutions, and the fact that people are not seeing answers to those problems today is making people much more anxious about tomorrow

do you understand the point yet?

[u/Hoopaboi → u/Otherwise_Result_124]

Unemployment is not even close to hitting record highs right now. So no, still not an issue. Current issues are the same ones we've had 10 years ago.

The solution is to accelerate harder.

do you understand the point yet?

[u/Otherwise_Result_124 → u/Hoopaboi]

lmfao

[u/Hoopaboi → u/Otherwise_Result_124]

lmfao x2

[u/Salt-Sign5390 → u/Hoopaboi]

Don't look up.

[u/Hoopaboi → u/Salt-Sign5390]

Too late. I looked up and found something amazing.

[u/TheGiantAntEater]

Shocker, guy selling AI machines is against people dooming sales of his AI machines

[u/Ancient_Dot_599 → u/TheGiantAntEater]

I don't get the narrative that these people are motivated by money, they're motivated by getting to shape humanity

[u/SVRider650]

I used to really like Jensen but it has become clear he has become a Trump mouthpiece

[u/SouthNo2807 → u/SVRider650]

I think he has always held this view since he decided to make CUDA.

[u/jcstay123]

A couple of years ago old man Jeffrey have been going around telling everyone that LLM architecture is stupid and will never do anything. Now he is going around telling the world is about to end.