Artificial Intelligence (AI)

[Vowels]

I'm an insurance guy and I'm concerned.

[danny.]

Yea you are super easy to replace, anything that's a process/methodical/uses a computer mainly (so most office based jobs) will be one of the first things to go.

[Trumpet]

28 minutes ago, danny. said:

Oh yea, it's suicide even for the AI companies. Some people will get rich in the short term and then everything will crash.

It's changed massively in the last 2 months so it's not gonna take 10 years to really start to impact society. Later this year, early 2027 is a conservative guess.

Without taking this to the tin foil hat thread, there’s been some high profile US folk talk about non human intelligence and there’s a lot of rumours around the year 2027. I do wonder if when they talk of non human intelligence, it’s in fact AI and 2027 coincides with the point of singularity or something.

[danny.]

29 minutes ago, Trumpet said:

Without taking this to the tin foil hat thread, there’s been some high profile US folk talk about non human intelligence and there’s a lot of rumours around the year 2027. I do wonder if when they talk of non human intelligence, it’s in fact AI and 2027 coincides with the point of singularity or something.

Sounds about the time we'll have properly hit AGI

[FoxesDeb]

1 hour ago, danny. said:

Yea you are super easy to replace, anything that's a process/methodical/uses a computer mainly (so most office based jobs) will be one of the first things to go.

My job is also very easy to replace, I work in customer relations for a tour operator and AI is already doing lots of work. Thankfully I am still just as busy even with AI's assistance, because the overall volume of work is also increasing. But I will definitely be pushed in to early retirement at some point I imagine, no big deal for me thankfully but devastating for the generations of people who would have followed me.

 

Unless of course the world moves to some kind of universal credit system where nobody really needs to work, how else will we sustain millions of people who literally can't get a job?

[danny.]

6 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Unless of course the world moves to some kind of universal credit system where nobody really needs to work, how else will we sustain millions of people who literally can't get a job?

This is exactly the problem. And where does the tax for UBI come from?

[FoxesDeb]

Just now, danny. said:

This is exactly the problem. And where does the tax for UBI come from?

The entities making the money from AI rather than people I guess? 

[Sampson]

18 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

My job is also very easy to replace, I work in customer relations for a tour operator and AI is already doing lots of work. Thankfully I am still just as busy even with AI's assistance, because the overall volume of work is also increasing. But I will definitely be pushed in to early retirement at some point I imagine, no big deal for me thankfully but devastating for the generations of people who would have followed me.

 

Unless of course the world moves to some kind of universal credit system where nobody really needs to work, how else will we sustain millions of people who literally can't get a job?

The problem is I think most people like to feel like they’re being productive to society I reckon. I was unemployed for a few months when I was younger and I remember it feeling terrible and made me feel worthless and was hard to motivate myself to get up in the morning.

 

I’m not sure how many would cope with being on a universal credit system. Not to mention the power it gives to stop the universal credit from the state or mega tech corporations divvying them out  

[FoxesDeb]

3 minutes ago, Sampson said:

The problem is I think most people like to feel like they’re being productive to society I reckon. I was unemployed for a few months when I was younger and I remember it feeling terrible and made me feel worthless and was hard to motivate myself to get up in the morning.

 

I’m not sure how many would cope with being on a universal credit system. Not to mention the power it gives to stop the universal credit from the state or mega tech corporations divvying them out  

I agree with the sentiment, but I also think if this is way the world goes and it becomes the default way of life for millions of people it would be a lot easier to cope with

[danny.]

11 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

I agree with the sentiment, but I also think if this is way the world goes and it becomes the default way of life for millions of people it would be a lot easier to cope with

It won't be like that though, we're not living in the Star Trek universe. I'd love to think it would be some utopia but it will be nothing like that based on my experience and observations of humans.

[FoxesDeb]

2 minutes ago, danny. said:

It won't be like that though, we're not living in the Star Trek universe. I'd love to think it would be some utopia but it will be nothing like that based on my experience and observations of humans.

I don't think any of us can say what it will be like though can we? I've never watched Star Trek so can't comment on that, but the only way humanity will survive the onslaught of AI taking our jobs will have to be something like this otherwise there is no hope for any of us, climate change aside and the global migration shift that will bring with it

[Trumpet]

43 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

The entities making the money from AI rather than people I guess? 

What worries me about this is there will be an exclusive group of billionaires (this already exists, I believe) that have ownership of AI that probably won’t have any use for the general unemployed population. Not sure how it plays out at that point.

[FoxesDeb]

13 minutes ago, Trumpet said:

What worries me about this is there will be an exclusive group of billionaires (this already exists, I believe) that have ownership of AI that probably won’t have any use for the general unemployed population. Not sure how it plays out at that point.

Agreed, and this is why we already have political groups working to divide us, telling us that people who don't look quite like us are 'taking are jobs' and not integrating into 'are culture' when actually the people looking for a better life are a tiny fraction of the problem, and creating nowhere near anything like the actual problems we will be facing.

 

But while people are busy painting roundabouts, hanging union flags upside down and foaming at the mouth about the absolute nonsense that immigrants get everything for free they are not paying attention to the issues which really are going to change their lives beyond all recognition

[danny.]

I don't think AI has much to do with immigration TBH, but one relevance it will have is that the more people we have in the country the more we need to pay UBI and more to feed, so not sure why we want to grow the population, which we are always told we DO need to do.

[FoxesDeb]

8 minutes ago, danny. said:

I don't think AI has much to do with immigration TBH, but one relevance it will have is that the more people we have in the country the more we need to pay UBI and more to feed, so not sure why we want to grow the population, which we are always told we DO need to do.

The relevance immigration has is as my post says, we have people working to use it as a tool to distract the population from matters which are much more pressing, the destruction AI will cause to the national workforce being only one of them.

 

Once climate change starts forcing the migration of millions of people seeking somewhere habitable I fear that AI may be the least of our worries tbh

[danny.]

Can't agree there, but I guess we will see. There will load of the world habitable where people can survive, but developed countries will see economic collapse. What a time to be alive!

[leicsmac]

40 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

The relevance immigration has is as my post says, we have people working to use it as a tool to distract the population from matters which are much more pressing, the destruction AI will cause to the national workforce being only one of them.

 

Once climate change starts forcing the migration of millions of people seeking somewhere habitable I fear that AI may be the least of our worries tbh

 

23 minutes ago, danny. said:

Can't agree there, but I guess we will see. There will load of the world habitable where people can survive, but developed countries will see economic collapse. What a time to be alive!

It won't be just about finding places in the world that are habitable, it will also be about massive critical shortages of potable water in places where it is critically needed. Without fresh and potable water, you have nothing on which any kind of civilisation can be built. 

 

Ironically, AI and data centres are causing consumption issues on that score as well already. 

 

Additionally, wrt recent discussion:

 

On 30/01/2026 at 07:32, leicsmac said:

 

However, I do believe that a workable solution exists purely because this is a problem of resource management (and therefore at least possibly under human control) than that of direct vital resource scarcity (which would offer much fewer choices in terms of dealing with and all of them are bad).

This still applies imo. 

[danny.]

14 hours ago, leicsmac said:

This still applies imo. 

However, I do believe that a workable solution exists purely because this is a problem of resource management (and therefore at least possibly under human control) than that of direct vital resource scarcity (which would offer much fewer choices in terms of dealing with and all of them are bad).

That would be quite the u turn for humans to go in that direction over the growing inequality model we've had for the rest of our existence.

Not sure your premise holds anyway, though, as for many people and countries services and time are the resources.

[Samilktray]

Feel like I'm being a bit too relaxed about AI because reading the last few pages of this thread have made me feel thoroughly miserable

[leicsmac]

32 minutes ago, danny. said:

That would be quite the u turn for humans to go in that direction over the growing inequality model we've had for the rest of our existence.

Not sure your premise holds anyway, though, as for many people and countries services and time are the resources.

It surely would be, but at least the possibility exists, unlike much sharper matters of scarcity where the possibilities are almost universally bad.

 

Time is likely the biggest "human created" resource there is (that's what money buys you, your own time to do things you want to do), I agree. There is still, however, a distinction to be drawn between something important but still constructed (like time) and an absolutely physical vital resource, like water. Scarcity of the former still allows our species something of an element of control, at least theoretically. Scarcity of the latter does not. 

[danny.]

1 hour ago, Samilktray said:

Feel like I'm being a bit too relaxed about AI because reading the last few pages of this thread have made me feel thoroughly miserable

Don't read any more. The more you know the more utterly depressing it is. Just live in blissful ignorance for as long as possible.

[danny.]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

It surely would be, but at least the possibility exists, unlike much sharper matters of scarcity where the possibilities are almost universally bad.

 

Time is likely the biggest "human created" resource there is (that's what money buys you, your own time to do things you want to do), I agree. There is still, however, a distinction to be drawn between something important but still constructed (like time) and an absolutely physical vital resource, like water. Scarcity of the former still allows our species something of an element of control, at least theoretically. Scarcity of the latter does not. 

So are you saying there isn't enough water for everyone? Not really sure what you're getting at.

I don't think you can boil society down to just basic resources, it's far more complex than that. And if you do you just end up with Mad Max in that scenario.

[leicsmac]

10 minutes ago, danny. said:

So are you saying there isn't enough water for everyone? Not really sure what you're getting at.

I don't think you can boil society down to just basic resources, it's far more complex than that. And if you do you just end up with Mad Max in that scenario.

I'm saying that rather shortly, there may well be not enough water for everyone, yes. And I think that's a probable enough threat to take very seriously. 

 

And yes, Mad Max is exactly where we end up when we take such basic resources for granted, no matter how complex the mechanics of civilisation are at any one time. I absolutely agree that proliferation and misuse of AI is one possible route by which we might end up there, too. 

[danny.]

 

[Sampson]

To follow on from the above. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dlvdq3e3o

 

AI safety leader says 'world is in peril' and quits to study poetry

 

2 hours ago

Liv McMahon,Technology reporterand

Ottilie Mitchell

 

An AI safety researcher has quit US firm Anthropic with a cryptic warning that the "world is in peril".

 

In his resignation letter shared on X, Mrinank Sharma told the firm he was leaving amid concerns about AI, bioweapons and the state of the wider world.

 

He said he would instead look to pursue writing and studying poetry, and move back to the UK to "become invisible".

 

It comes in the same week that an OpenAI researcher said she had resigned, sharing concerns about the ChatGPT maker's decision to deploy adverts in its chatbot.

 

Anthropic, best known for its Claude chatbot, had released a series of commercials aimed at OpenAI, criticising the company's move to include adverts for some users.

The company, which was formed in 2021 by a breakaway team of early OpenAI employees, has positioned itself as having a more safety-orientated approach to AI research compared with its rivals.

Sharma led a team there which researched AI safeguards.

He said in his resignation letter his contributions included investigating why generative AI systems suck up to users, combatting AI-assisted bioterrorism risks and researching "how AI assistants could make us less human".

 

But he said despite enjoying his time at the company, it was clear "the time has come to move on".

 

"The world is in peril. And not just from AI, or bioweapons, but from a whole series of interconnected crises unfolding in this very moment," Sharma wrote.

 

He said he had "repeatedly seen how hard it is to truly let our values govern our actions" - including at Anthropic which he said "constantly face pressures to set aside what matters most".

 

Sharma said he would instead look to pursue a poetry degree and writing.

He added in a reply: "I'll be moving back to the UK and letting myself become invisible for a period of time."

Those departing AI firms which have loomed large in the latest generative AI boom - and sought to retain talent with huge salaries or compensation offers - often do so with plenty of shares and benefits intact.

 

Eroding principles

Anthropic calls itself a "public benefit corporation dedicated to securing [AI's] benefits and mitigating its risks".

In particular, it has focused on preventing those it believes are posed by more advanced frontier systems, such as them becoming misaligned with human values, misused in areas such as conflict or too powerful.

It has released reports on the safety of its own products, including when it said its technology had been "weaponised" by hackers to carry out sophisticated cyber attacks.

But it has also come under scrutiny over its practices. In 2025, it agreed to pay $1.5bn (£1.1bn) to settle a class action lawsuit filed by authors who said the company stole their work to train its AI models.

 

Like OpenAI, the firm also seeks to seize on the technology's benefits, including through its own AI products such as its ChatGPT rival Claude.

It recently released a commercial that criticised OpenAI's move to start running ads in ChatGPT.

OpenAI boss Sam Altman had previously said he hated ads and would use them as a "last resort".

Last week, he hit back at the advert's description of this as a "betrayal" - but was mocked for his lengthy post criticising Anthropic.

 

1:38

Watch: Zoe Hitzig on why she quit

A former OpenAI researcher who resigned this week, in part due to fears of the use of advertising on ChatGPT, has told BBC Newsnight she feels "really nervous about working in the industry". 

 

Zoe Hitzig said her concerns stemmed from the possible psychosocial impacts of a "new type of social interaction" that were not yet understood.

 

She noted "early warning signs" that dependence on AI tools were "worrisome" and could "reinforce certain kinds of delusions" as well as negatively impacting users' mental health in other ways.

 

"Creating an economic engine that profits from encouraging these kinds of new relationships before we understand them is really dangerous," she continued.

 

"We saw what happened with social media" she said, noting "there's still time to set up the social institutions, the forms of regulation that can actually govern this". It was, she said, a "critical moment".

 

Responding to BBC News, a spokesperson for OpenAI pointed to the firm's principles which state: "Our mission is to ensure AGI benefits all of humanity; our pursuit of advertising is always in support of that mission and making AI more accessible."

 

They add: "We keep your conversations with ChatGPT private from advertisers, and we never sell your data to advertisers."

Edited 13 February by Sampson