Anthropic Researchers Warn That Humans Could End Up Being "Meat Robots" Controlled by AI
Researchers at one of the world's leading AI labs are warning that humans may soon be little more than "meat robots" for near-future artificial intelligence systems.
During a recent interview with AI podcaster Dwarkesh Patel, Anthropic researchers Sholto Douglas and Trenton Bricken were surprisingly casual when fretting that the technology they're working to build may soon render us into AI-controlled androids — or, at the very least, further grim job loss to the technology.
"There is this whole spectrum of crazy futures," Douglas, who worked at Google DeepMind until earlier this year, told the 24-year-old podcaster. One such future involves a "drop in white collar workers" over the next two to five years, the researcher said — one that he thinks will come to pass "even if algorithmic progress stalls out."
Bricken, meanwhile, had more grandiose prognostications about the future he and his colleagues in the AI space are building.
"The really scary future is one in which AIs can do everything except for the physical robotic tasks," he declared. "In which case, you'll have humans with AirPods, and glasses and there'll be some robot overlord controlling the human through cameras by just telling it what to do."
(Yes, you read that right — this AI researcher did, in fact, refer to fellow humans as "it." )
"Basically," Bricken continued, "you're having human meat robots."
Douglas quickly jumped in at that point to, it seems, defend the technology.
"Not necessarily saying," he interjected, "that that's what the AIs would want to do or anything like that."
Regardless of AI intent — if such a thing could exist — Douglas reasoned that we humans are in for a "pretty terrible decade" as the technology takes over.
Human labor will, Douglas predicted, primarily be valued upon how well we can do physical work that AI cannot, like so many Taskrabbits for the algorithmic powers that be — but luckily, we make "fantastic robots" to that end.
"That's a shocking, shocking world," he concluded. We've got to say we agree.
More on AI robots: New AI Startup Giving Robots Virtual Heart Rate, Body Temperature, Sweating Response So They Can Better Emulate Human Emotions Like Fear and Anxiety
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
OpenAI scrubs news of Jony Ive deal amid trademark dispute
OpenAI has removed news of its deal with Jony Ive's io from its website. The takedown comes amid a trademark dispute filed by iyO, an AI hardware startup. OpenAI said it doesn't agree with the complaint and is "reviewing our options." Turns out "i" and "o" make for a popular combination of vowels in the tech industry. Sam Altman's OpenAI launched a very public partnership with io, the company owned by famed Apple designer Jony Ive, in May. The announcement included a splashy video and photos of the two of them looking like old friends. On Sunday, however, OpenAI scrubbed any mention of that partnership from its website and social media. That's because iyO, a startup spun out of Google's moonshot factory, X, and which sounds like io, is suing OpenAI, io, Altman, and Ive for trademark infringement. iyO's latest product, iyO ONE, is an "ear-worn device that uses specialized microphones and bone-conducted sound to control audio-based applications with nothing more than the user's voice," according to the suit iyO filed on June 9. The partnership between OpenAI and io, meanwhile, is rumored to be working on a similarly screen-less, voice-activated AI device. According to its deal with OpenAI, Ive's firm will lead creative direction and design at OpenAI, focusing on developing a new slate of consumer devices. When the deal was announced, neither party shared specific details about future products. However, Altman said the partnership would shape the "future of AI." iyO approached OpenAI earlier this year about a potential collaboration and funding. OpenAI declined that offer, however, and says it is now fighting the trademark lawsuit. "We don't agree with the complaint and are reviewing our options," OpenAI told Business Insider. Read the original article on Business Insider
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
ChatGPT Has Already Polluted the Internet So Badly That It's Hobbling Future AI Development
The rapid rise of ChatGPT — and the cavalcade of competitors' generative models that followed suit — has polluted the internet with so much useless slop that it's already kneecapping the development of future AI models. As the AI-generated data clouds the human creations that these models are so heavily dependent on amalgamating, it becomes inevitable that a greater share of what these so-called intelligences learn from and imitate is itself an ersatz AI creation. Repeat this process enough, and AI development begins to resemble a maximalist game of telephone in which not only is the quality of the content being produced diminished, resembling less and less what it's originally supposed to be replacing, but in which the participants actively become stupider. The industry likes to describe this scenario as AI "model collapse." As a consequence, the finite amount of data predating ChatGPT's rise becomes extremely valuable. In a new feature, The Register likens this to the demand for "low-background steel," or steel that was produced before the detonation of the first nuclear bombs, starting in July 1945 with the US's Trinity test. Just as the explosion of AI chatbots has irreversibly polluted the internet, so did the detonation of the atom bomb release radionuclides and other particulates that have seeped into virtually all steel produced thereafter. That makes modern metals unsuitable for use in some highly sensitive scientific and medical equipment. And so, what's old is new: a major source of low-background steel, even today, is WW1 and WW2 era battleships, including a huge naval fleet that was scuttled by German Admiral Ludwig von Reuter in 1919. Maurice Chiodo, a research associate at the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at the University of Cambridge called the admiral's actions the "greatest contribution to nuclear medicine in the world." "That enabled us to have this almost infinite supply of low-background steel. If it weren't for that, we'd be kind of stuck," he told The Register. "So the analogy works here because you need something that happened before a certain date." "But if you're collecting data before 2022 you're fairly confident that it has minimal, if any, contamination from generative AI," he added. "Everything before the date is 'safe, fine, clean,' everything after that is 'dirty.'" In 2024, Chiodo co-authored a paper arguing that there needs to be a source of "clean" data not only to stave off model collapse, but to ensure fair competition between AI developers. Otherwise, the early pioneers of the tech, after ruining the internet for everyone else with their AI's refuse, would boast a massive advantage by being the only ones that benefited from a purer source of training data. Whether model collapse, particularly as a result of contaminated data, is an imminent threat is a matter of some debate. But many researchers have been sounding the alarm for years now, including Chiodo. "Now, it's not clear to what extent model collapse will be a problem, but if it is a problem, and we've contaminated this data environment, cleaning is going to be prohibitively expensive, probably impossible," he told The Register. One area where the issue has already reared its head is with the technique called retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), which AI models use to supplement their dated training data with information pulled from the internet in real-time. But this new data isn't guaranteed to be free of AI tampering, and some research has shown that this results in the chatbots producing far more "unsafe" responses. The dilemma is also reflective of the broader debate around scaling, or improving AI models by adding more data and processing power. After OpenAI and other developers reported diminishing returns with their newest models in late 2024, some experts proclaimed that scaling had hit a "wall." And if that data is increasingly slop-laden, the wall would become that much more impassable. Chiodo speculates that stronger regulations like labeling AI content could help "clean up" some of this pollution, but this would be difficult to enforce. In this regard, the AI industry, which has cried foul at any government interference, may be its own worst enemy. "Currently we are in a first phase of regulation where we are shying away a bit from regulation because we think we have to be innovative," Rupprecht Podszun, professor of civil and competition law at Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, who co-authored the 2024 paper with Chiodo, told The Register. "And this is very typical for whatever innovation we come up with. So AI is the big thing, let it go and fine." More on AI: Sam Altman Says "Significant Fraction" of Earth's Total Electricity Should Go to Running AI
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
OpenAI Concerned That Its AI Is About to Start Spitting Out Novel Bioweapons
OpenAI is bragging that its forthcoming models are so advanced, they may be capable of building brand-new bioweapons. In a recent blog post, the company said that even as it builds more and more advanced models that will have "positive use cases like biomedical research and biodefense," it feels a duty to walk the tightrope between "enabling scientific advancement while maintaining the barrier to harmful information." That "harmful information" includes, apparently, the ability to "assist highly skilled actors in creating bioweapons." "Physical access to labs and sensitive materials remains a barrier," the post reads — but "those barriers are not absolute." In a statement to Axios, OpenAI safety head Johannes Heidecke clarified that although the company does not necessarily think its forthcoming AIs will be able to manufacture bioweapons on their own, they will be advanced enough to help amateurs do so. "We're not yet in the world where there's like novel, completely unknown creation of biothreats that have not existed before," Heidecke said. "We are more worried about replicating things that experts already are very familiar with." The OpenAI safety czar also admitted that while the company's models aren't quite there yet, it expects "some of the successors of our o3 (reasoning model) to hit that level." "Our approach is focused on prevention," the blog post reads. "We don't think it's acceptable to wait and see whether a bio threat event occurs before deciding on a sufficient level of safeguards." As Axios notes, there's some concern that the very same models that assist in biomedical breakthroughs may also be exploited by bad actors . To "prevent harm from materializing," as Heidecke put it, these forthcoming models need to be programmed to "near perfection" to both recognize and alert human monitors to any dangers. "This is not something where like 99 percent or even one in 100,000 performance is sufficient," he said. Instead of heading off such dangerous capabilities at the pass, though, OpenAI seems to be doubling down on building these advanced models, albeit with ample safeguards. It's a noble enough effort, but it's easy to see how it could go all wrong. Placed in the hands of, say, an insurgent agency like the United States' Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, it would be easy enough to use such models for harm. If OpenAI is serious about so-called "biodefense" contracting with the US government, it's not hard to envision a next-generation smallpox blanket scenario. More on OpenAI: Conspiracy Theorists Are Creating Special AIs to Agree With Their Bizarre Delusions
