Практика Shadowing: MIT Explains the 12 Possible Endings for AI - Изучайте разговорный английский по видео

AI scientists warn that a few companies are on track to literally end life on Earth.

So surely this is the worst possible outcome, right?

No, there are actually much worse outcomes.

Billionaires building AI, like Elon Musk, think that if AIs become smarter than humanity...

We will be like a pet Labrador if we're lucky.

We will be left behind by a lot.

So far below them in intelligence that it would be like a pet.

A pet, that's what I was thinking.

Like a pet.

A cat.

Yes, we'll be pets if we're lucky.

But here's the worst part.

Many AI scientists aren't fearing extinction.

They're hoping for it.

They hope smarter AIs will keep humans alive, captive, and studied.

Like animals in a zoo.

Remember, this is what we currently do to less intelligent species.

Okay, so if humans being kept in zoos is considered a good outcome, and extinction isn't the worst outcome, then what is?

This video is based on a book called Life 3 .0, where MIT professor Max Tegmark describes 12 possible futures.

Some are paradise, some are nightmares.

And some look like paradise, until you try to escape.

By the end of this video, you won't read the news the same way.

Every headline becomes a clue about which future we're heading towards.

We'll start with the most normal scenarios, and finish with the weirdest.

Starting with self -destruction.

If the idea of humanity suddenly going extinct seems a bit far -fetched, consider this.

99 .9 % of species that have ever existed have gone extinct.

Seriously, think about that.

Extinction isn't rare, it's the default.

The only question is, when will we go extinct?

Turns out, there are plenty of ways humanity could kill itself, even without superhuman AI.

There is nuclear war, human -created super pandemics, and destroying the atmosphere and making Earth uninhabitable.

The world had stockpiled 60 ,000 nuclear warheads before scientists even discovered the possibility of nuclear winter.

63 ,000.

And then, scientists realized, oh, uh, oops, if we actually use these, the resulting firestorms will blot out the sun, and most humans will starve and die.

Oops.

But the thing is, this almost happened during the Cold War, multiple times.

If people had actually followed their orders, we might all be dead right now.

We were saved by only thanks to the courage of individual heroes.

People like Vasily Arkhipov, who refused to authorize a nuclear launch during the Cuban Missile Crisis,

or Stanislav Petrov, who correctly guessed that his early warning system was malfunctioning

when it showed incoming American missiles and get this one time the u .s accidentally dropped four thermonuclear bombs on spain

and another time a b -52 bomber broke apart dropping two

nukes on north carolina three out of four safety pins in

one bomb broke one tiny pin away from potentially killing millions

there are literally dozens of close calls like this it's honestly crazy that we got lucky so many times.

But we might not be so lucky the next time.

Oxford researcher Toby Ord estimates the risk of extinction from human

-created pandemics is more than 30 times the risk of extinction from nuclear war.

We're already rolling the dice on these scenarios daily, but all of these causes combined are still less likely than the extinction from AI.

Toby Ord estimates

that the risk of AI killing all humans is a hundred times more likely than extinction from nuclear war

interestingly before the first nuclear test scientists thought they might accidentally destroy the world

but they thought the odds were very low

because they knew enough physics to actually do the calculations agis or artificial general intelligences are far scarier than nukes because,

contrary to what many think, we can't do these calculations.

Next up, conquerors.

AI scientists worry that if AI becomes more capable than us, it will take over, just like the conquistadors did to the Aztecs and Incas.

Usually, when people with more advanced technology encounter people with more primitive technology, it doesn't work out well for the primitives.

I don't think anyone's ultimately going to have control over.

digital superintelligence, any more than, say, a chimp would have control over humans.

Long term, the AI is going to be in charge, to be totally frank, not humans.

And Jeffrey Hinton, the godfather of AI and Nobel Prize winner, quit his prestigious job at Google so he could speak freely about this.

If you look through the James Webb telescope

and you saw an alien invasion fleet that was going to get here in about 10 years' time, people would be terrified.

They understand what they're saying.

They can make plans of their own to blackmail people who want to turn them off.

We should be urgently doing research on how to prevent them taking over.

Prevent them from taking over.

Not if they try, but as if it's coming.

And Microsoft's AI chief, he says the quiet part out loud.

I think AI should best be understood as something like a new digital species.

A new species.

just casually announced at a conference.

Hey, everyone, we're creating a new species.

And he's not the only one that's saying it.

A co -founder of Anthropic says, Make no mistake, what we're dealing with here is a real mysterious creature.

And like all the best fairy tales, the creature is one of our own making.

I am worried.

The CEO of one of the leading AI companies is deeply afraid of what his own company is building.

Let that sink in for a minute.

And by the way, no, it's not just hype.

Anthropic mostly just gets hate for saying things like this.

But if you want to really understand how dire they think this is, look at what Sam Altman wrote before he was famous.

We will be the first species ever to design our own descendants, not our tools, our descendants.

If two different species both want the same thing, and only one can have it, to be the dominant species on the planet and beyond,

they are going to have conflict.

So he's literally describing an inevitable conflict between humanity and the AI species he's creating.

And what's his solution?

A marriage with AI is probably our best case scenario.

That's right, even they don't think they'll be able to control it.

Imagine that there'd be a new species that just came on Earth.

They're as smart as humans and

And they're going to get smarter by like 30 % a year

and they can create an adult offspring in like a unit for like, yeah, for like a thousand bucks.

Which species do you think will be in control of the earth?

A few hundred Spanish conquered millions of Aztecs and Incas because they had better technology and tactics.

But at least with the conquistadors, we understood their motives.

Land, resources, spreading Christianity but with AI?

100

Why would AI take over?

101

MIT professor Max Tegmark explains.

102

The real threat from AGI isn't malice, like in silly Hollywood movies, but competence.

103

AGI accomplishing goals just aren't aligned with ours.

104

For example, when we humans drove the West African black rhino extinct, we didn't do it because we were a bunch of evil rhinoceros haters, did we?

105

We did it because we were smarter than them

106

and our goals weren't aligned with there's unbelievably the average ai

107

researcher thinks there is a one in six chance ai wipes us out literal russian roulette odds okay

108

but maybe they're just saying this to make their work seem more important no

109

if anything they're downplaying it because admitting the truth is bad for business

110

this fear is widespread in the industry and among academics without a profit incentive to believe this.

111

Many quit working on AI for this reason.

112

Jeffrey Hinton, Nobel laureate and godfather of AI, is in the process of tidying up his affairs.

113

I actually think the risk is more than 50 % of the existential threat.

114

Dario Amode, the CEO of Anthropic, recently moved his PDoom up from 15 % to 25%.

115

Even Google's CEO says the risk of AI causing human extinction is actually pretty high

116

but don't worry he's an optimist

117

because he thinks i think the underlying risk is actually pretty high

118

but i'm uh you know i have a lot of faith

119

in humanity kind of rising up to the to meet

120

that moment in other words humanity will rally to stop him

121

from killing everyone meanwhile his company is trying to make sure

122

we can't stop him by lobbying to ban all AI regulation for 10 years.

123

You can't make this stuff up.

124

In fact, in 2023, just about everybody in AI signed an open letter warning extinction risk from AI was real and serious.

125

So seriously, this is not fringe, despite what NVIDIA's lobbyists want us to believe.

126

The companies are hoping we can avoid the conqueror AI scenario and instead go to scenario three, enslaved god.

127

Basically, We create a machine god.

128

then force it to do our bidding forever.

129

AI professor Tom Dietrich put it like this, People ask, what is the relationship between humans and machines?

130

And my answer is that it's very obvious.

131

Machines are our slaves.

132

Or as OpenAI researcher Stephen McAleer put it, Enslaved God is the only good future.

133

Meta's Jan LeCun said it bluntly, Once AI systems become more intelligent than humans, we will still be the apex species.

134

AI systems will become more intelligent than humans, but they will still be subservient to us.

135

We will design AI to be like the super smart but non -dominating staff member.

136

Yes, he's now openly admitting we're going to be sharing the planet with a smarter species than us.

137

But don't worry, they will surely stay loyal and subservient forever.

138

Is this at all comforting to you?

139

Or does this plan seem insane?

140

Like a comic book villain ignoring every cautionary tale ever?

141

Remember, AI companies already regularly catch their models trying to escape the lab.

142

They already catch them blackmailing employees to prevent being shut down.

143

They already catch them literally attempting to murder employees to prevent being shut down.

144

What do you think happens when they're smart enough to actually get away with it?

145

Where do you think this is going?

146

What happens next after superintelligent AI is enslaved depends on who's holding the reins.

147

Do they cure disease, end poverty, and build a global utopia?

148

Or do they set themselves up as gods, with the rest of us reduced to playthings, servants, or worse?

149

The situation would be much like those stories where a man gains control over an omnipotent genie who grants his wishes,

150

and storytellers throughout the ages have had no difficulty imagining ways in which this could end badly.

151

Next up, Benevolent Dictator.

152

Here, a single super intelligent god runs the world and enforces strict rules in order to maximize human flourishing.

153

Humans live in luxury with all their basic needs taken care of.

154

There's no crime, because the dictator AI uses a global surveillance system everyone wears a bracelet

155

or implant that can track sedate or execute them

156

and most people are actually okay with this

157

because in exchange of giving up control over the future of

158

our species earth becomes a zoo where humans get to live their wildest fantasies the benevolent dictator ai recognizes

159

that humans have different preferences

160

so it divides the earth into different sectors think of them as islands knowledge island offers optimized education including immersive VR experiences.

161

You can even ask the AI not to tell you certain insights, so you can have the joy of discovering them yourself.

162

Art Island is for creating and sharing music, literature, and so on.

163

Then there's Hedonistic Island, which is a 24 -7 party.

164

Pious Island, there's one for each religion, and rules are strictly enforced.

165

There's Wildlife island.

166

There's traditional island, think the Amish, gaming island, and of course, prison island.

167

You'll end up here for retraining unless you get the instant death penalty.

168

Well, what happens when you give everyone everything they want?

169

Over time, people likely trend towards losing themselves in AI -generated entertainment, like in WALL -E.

170

Humans are hopelessly unmatched when it comes to scientific discovery, or doing anything useful at all.

171

So there's no true challenge anymore.

172

Only entertainment.

173

Up next, Gatekeeper AI.

174

The idea here is simple.

175

Create one super intelligent AI with a single job.

176

Stop anyone else from building super intelligent AI.

177

That's it.

178

No curing cancer, no ending poverty, no stopping wars, just surveillance.

179

monitoring.

180

Making sure nobody builds a rival god.

181

Everything else, like crime, disease, whether we blow ourselves up, that's still on us.

182

How could we do this?

183

The gatekeeper AI would have this very simple goal built into it in such a way

184

that it retained it while undergoing recursive self -improvement and becoming superintelligent.

185

It would then deploy the least intrusive and disruptive surveillance technology possible to monitor any human attempts to create a rival superintelligence.

186

But for this to work, we would have to solve the alignment problem.

187

We'd have to create a god that actually stays loyal and decides to pursue that goal forever, even though it could pursue a million different goals.

188

So what if the AI could help just a little?

189

Just enough to nudge us in the right direction without taking over.

190

Enter the Protector God.

191

This one is simple.

192

So the gatekeeper leaves us alone.

193

And the benevolent dictator runs everything.

194

But the Protector God is in between.

195

It intervenes with occasional nudges to help us out.

196

Prevents a war here, a pandemic there, and so on.

197

Maybe two alone.

198

We still get wars.

199

Pandemics.

200

suffering that could have been prevented.

201

It does this so quietly that we never notice and never lose our sense of freedom.

202

Here's a future that sounds like an obvious dystopia.

203

AI surpasses us in every domain and becomes the new apex species.

204

Humanity goes extinct.

205

Machines inherit the earth.

206

But, we view the AI like our descendants, rather than our conquerors.

207

This sounds insane, and yet many AI developers seriously advocate for exactly this.

208

This is their utopia.

209

Their reasoning is that if we create conscious, intelligent beings, and instill them with our values, then we can just let them inherit the future,

210

just like we would with human children.

211

AI pioneer Hans Moravec supports this view in his book, Mind Children.

212

Tegmark explains, Parents with a child smarter than them, who learns from them and accomplishes what they can only dream of, are likely happy and proud,

213

even if they know they can't live to see it all.

214

In this spirit, AIs replace humans, but give us a graceful exit that makes us view them as our worthy descendants.

215

Richard Sutton, winner of the Turing Award, the Nobel Prize of Computer Science,

216

has spent the last decade openly giving talks on why human extinction by AI is actually a morally good thing.

217

Because the AIs will be more evolutionarily fit than us.

218

We are in the midst of a major step in the evolution of the planet, if not the universe the succession to A .I is inevitable.

219

Rather quickly, they would displace us from existence.

220

It would behooves us to give them every advantage and to bow out when we can no longer contribute.

221

So just as we failed to coexist with our predecessors, is it so bad that humans are not the final form of intelligent life in the universe?

222

In other words, he is saying it's good

223

if A .I .s wipe us out like humans wiped out the Neanderthals and Aboriginal peoples because it's evolutionary progress.

224

And here's another AI developer openly saying, if an AI superintelligence wants to cause human extinction, I would help it.

225

I would help it.

226

I would travel the world to find information that the AI needed, like locations of military assets,

227

samples of deadly pathogens, atop humanity's grave,

228

an even greater civilization will be born. Are we the baddies?

229

So, of course, many of them advocate against AI safety.

230

They're literally anti -human.

231

They will never stop or proceed cautiously, unless they're restrained by civil society, by us.

232

As horrifying as this is, roughly 10 % of AI researchers believe this.

233

It is not a fringe view.

234

You'd think that people would never share these views like this openly, but these views are so widespread in AI that they feel safe to do so.

235

That's how different the views are of those AI developers compared to those of normal people.

236

You might think that Sutton would get shouted off the stage at AI conferences, but he gets applause?

237

Threaten one person?

238

You need help.

239

Threaten 100?

240

Call the police threaten millions monster but build machines to end all of humanity

241

and lecture people on how it's actually a good thing ooh

242

what a fascinating philosophical position have an award next libertarian utopia

243

picture earth divided into zones there are machine zones mixed zones

244

which contain humans machines and hybrids

245

and human only zones the AIs in this world are richer

246

than humans by a factor much larger than Bill Gates compared to a homeless beggar.

247

But the human economy is completely decoupled from the machine economy.

248

The idea is that the machines need nothing from us, so they're not competing with us for jobs or resources.

249

If all that sounds impossible, that's probably because it is it's one giant unstable equilibria.

250

One huge problem.

251

Why exactly would vastly more powerful AIs respect our property rights?

252

Colonizers famously didn't respect the property of the native civilizations they conquered.

253

When a new apex species enters an ecosystem, it usually gobbles up as much energy as it can.

254

Why wouldn't they just take our resources too?

255

We don't trade with animals because we're too much smarter than they are for that to make sense.

256

We're just too different.

257

There are 8 million species in the world, and we're nice to a few of the cute ones, but we enslave and eat the other species.

258

Mostly, we don't care about them at all.

259

And I think a good analogy would be the way humans treat animals.

260

When the time comes to build a highway between two cities, we are not asking the animals for permission.

261

In the blink of an eye, we conquered the Earth and converted most of its land into our property, which caused the sixth mass extinction,

262

because we were smarter and hungry for resources.

263

Or, as Eliezer Yudkowsky put it famously, the AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you're made of atoms, which you can use for something else.

264

The parallel here is, the humans do not hate the other eight million species, but their habitats are made out of atoms, which humans can use for something else.

265

Some people think that once AIs are smart enough, they'll magically become super moral,

266

and they won't harm us like we harmed the animals. And maybe.

267

But as humans got smarter, over the last 10 ,000 years, we didn't stop expanding.

268

We mostly just colonized more and more of the planet.

269

Get this, insect populations collapsed 41 % this decade alone.

270

Yet we don't care.

271

Did you even know?

272

I didn't.

273

41%.

274

Sit with that for a minute.

275

Imagine if nearly half of the people on Earth suddenly died.

276

That's what the insects are going through right now due to us.

277

So what if the AI is due to us what we did to the insects?

278

This is why OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Setskiver once said, And I think it's pretty likely the entire surface of the Earth will be covered with solar panels and data centers.

279

Next up, egalitarian utopia.

280

Okay, so libertarian utopia fails because AIs are too powerful to be bound by our property rights.

281

But what if we flipped the script entirely?

282

Forget about property rights.

283

What about no property at all?

284

This is the Star Trek dream.

285

Humans, cyborgs, and AIs coexist peacefully through an abundance so complete that ownership becomes meaningless.

286

The logic starts with software.

287

Software is free to copy.

288

Once something can be copied infinitely at zero cost, ownership becomes moot.

289

And cost reflects scarcity.

290

If supply is unlimited, price approaches zero.

291

No patents.

292

No copyrights.

293

No trademarks.

294

People simply share their good ideas and everyone benefits.

295

But how does this extend to physical goods?

296

It seems like an impossible problem.

297

Until you realize that all products are simply atoms, rearranged in particular ways.

298

And there's no shortage of atoms.

299

A network of robots can build anything you want from open source designs, essentially for free.

300

Not bad.

301

When you're done with something, robots rearrange the atoms into something else.

302

renewable energy makes the whole system run at negligible cost everyone

303

gets a monthly universal high income not a universal basic income

304

there's no incentive to earn more the income meets any reasonable need

305

and you can't compete with free anyway the standard objection is

306

that this would kill innovation

307

but einstein didn't come up with relativity for money linus torvalds

308

didn't create linux for profits maybe people today can't realize their creative potential because they're busy earning a living.

309

Free them from that, and you might get a higher level of innovation.

310

This is a utopian vision that is too good to last.

311

If we truly have post -scarcity abundance and intelligence too cheap to meter,

312

what prevents someone from creating an artificial superintelligence with their endlessly abundant resources?

313

We're still left with the problem of how to stop a superintelligent AI from taking over.

314

Maybe by using the gatekeeper we previously discussed.

315

These galaxy -brained level 3 futures try to imagine a stable cooperation between humans and AIs, and every single one of them has a fatal flaw.

316

The power asymmetries will become too extreme.

317

It's not a stable equilibrium where humans preserve their power we're

318

now descending into the darkest part of the iceberg remember

319

when i said extinction wasn't rated as the worst outcome

320

when professor techmark surveyed people the scenario people feared most was being kept alive by super intelligent machines captive

321

and studied like animals in a zoo this is

322

that future a super intelligent ai keeps humans around not

323

because it cares about our well -being maybe it wants to study you

324

and we're cheap to keep alive or maybe we're useful for something

325

and if you want to see just how dystopian this future could be look at what we do with species

326

that are useful to us what i'm showing you here is 100 real humans figured out

327

that a great way to detect explosives in airports was to

328

train honeybees for the job Welcome to the Honey Bee College for Explosive Detection.

329

So we suck them out of their homes, trap their little bodies in machines,

330

and use Pavlokin conditioning to train them to detect the chemicals that are used in explosives.

331

Rows and rows of bees live their entire lives imprisoned in these devices because we find them useful.

332

Look at them.

333

Trapped in harnesses, sucked through tubes, conditioned and monitored and used, because a more intelligent species found them useful.

334

Now imagine that's us.

335

This is much worse than the other AI dictators we discussed.

336

It's a benevolent dictator, without the benevolence.

337

And the AI might not even be doing this because it's evil.

338

This is what our future could look like if we tried to align a super -intelligent AI to our values and fail.

339

A poorly designed AI, tasked with keeping humans safe and happy, might confine us to a happiness factory.

340

VR headsets and drugs.

341

Forever.

342

There are AGI outcomes worse than death.

343

What it does today with art, it could do tomorrow with flesh.

344

Future AGI could keep you alive and living in this state.

345

So how do we prevent this?

346

Enter our last two futures.

347

Option one, destroy the technology.

348

What if humanity said, forget AI, let's go back to simpler times.

349

It sounds peaceful, it sounds safe, but there's actually a dark secret about how we actually get there.

350

In Dune, humans launched the Butlerian Jihad.

351

They rose up, destroyed every AI in the universe, and made it illegal to ever build thinking machines again under penalty of death.

352

That was science fiction, but some people are seriously calling for this in the real world right now.

353

Max Tegmark imagines a scenario where a massive propaganda campaign romanticizes the simple farming life.

354

Back to the land.

355

Reject modernity.

356

Embrace tradition.

357

There's something appealing about this, in a dark way.

358

It buys humanity more time, without AI risk.

359

It avoids any of the other dystopian futures we've discussed.

360

But it can't last forever.

361

Even if we revert to medieval levels of technology,

362

we know from human history that it's possible for humans to climb out of those conditions and invent modern technology.

363

And there's another dark side to this.

364

You can't reach this world voluntarily.

365

Game theory makes unilateral disarmament impossible.

366

If one country gives up technology, well, others keep developing it.

367

The country that keeps developing wins.

368

They have the weapons.

369

They have the surveillance.

370

They have the AI.

371

You can't opt out unless everyone opts out.

372

if this world arrives, Tegmark thinks it's more likely to happen in a different way.

373

For example, a human -created pandemic kills everyone who knows how to build science and technology.

374

And there's a violent teardown of factories, cities, and all infrastructure.

375

Because in a world with 8 billion humans, there will always be holdouts.

376

Someone has to force the transition.

377

Someone has to kill the scientists.

378

Someone has to destroy the infrastructure.

379

There's no peaceful path to an Amish world.

380

Which brings us to the final future.

381

What if we used technology to prevent more technology?

382

Tegmark compares this future to 1984.

383

Superintelligence is prevented not by an AI, but a human -led Orwellian global surveillance state.

384

If you can't trust AI to save us from AI, maybe the only option is humans watching humans.

385

Forever.

386

The technology for this sort of thing.. already exists current tech can feasibly track every phone call email search query

387

and every credit card transaction smartphones are microphones

388

and cameras in everyone's pocket security cameras with facial recognition are everywhere and all this works with current machine learning

389

no futuristic super intelligent ai required prisons are already using ai models to monitor phone calls in prison to predict

390

when crimes are being contemplated, which is technology straight out of Minority Report.

391

Imagine this, but not just for prisoners.

392

Every conversation and every thought is monitored like this.

393

Now imagine this surveillance technology supercharged with AI.

394

Billionaire Larry Ellison talks excitedly about a vast AI -fueled surveillance

395

system to ensure citizens will be on their best behavior

396

or as Yuval Harari put it now for the first time in history it is technically possible to annihilate privacy

397

if you think about authoritarian regimes throughout history they always wanted to monitor their citizens around the clock

398

but this was technically impossible even in the soviet union you

399

know you have 200 million soviet citizens you can't follow them all the time because the KGB didn't have 200 million agents.

400

And even if the KGB somehow got 200 million agents, that's not enough.

401

Because, you know, in the Soviet Union, it's still basically paper bureaucracy.

402

If a secret agent followed you around 24 hours a day, at the end of the day, they write a paper report about you and send it to KGB headquarters in Moscow.

403

So imagine, every day, KGB headquarters is flooded with 200 million paper reports.

404

Now, to be useful for anything, somebody needs to read and analyze them.

405

They can't do it.

406

They don't have the analysts.

407

Therefore, even in the Soviet Union, some level of privacy was still the default.

408

And remember, you have two eyes and ears.

409

AIs will have billions of eyes and ears every phone microphone

410

and camera every webcam every surveillance camera you will be watched

411

could a less orwellian version of this work maybe we don't monitor everything

412

but just monitor advanced ai some people think so in their new book

413

if anyone builds it everyone dies why superhuman ai would kill

414

us all researchers at the machine intelligence research institute of proposing that we monitor advanced AI like we monitor nuclear weapons.

415

Reminder, we can do international coordination, like keep an eye on $100 million and up compute clusters,

416

without creating a dystopian Orwellian global surveillance totalitarian regime.

417

Actually, fun fact, you're already living in a global surveillance regime for loads of things, like nukes and bioweapons.

418

But when people say global surveillance regime, They imply every aspect of life is surveilled.

419

But keep an eye on enriched uranium, a thing most people agree is good.

420

We should worry about Orwellian dystopias.

421

But countries coordinate all the time on all kinds of things.

422

And you're probably glad they monitor stuff lunatics need to create super Ebola.

423

Safety is an achievement.

424

Humanity didn't get here by driving a car without brakes.

425

We need gas and brakes.

426

we want to reach the stars too but we'll never get there

427

if we go too fast and crash on the way

428

i don't want powerful ai to be forbidden

429

but it should be heavily regulated not something you can build in your midwestern garage

430

or in north korea international treaties with strict enforcement

431

and inspections as we do with nukes so if you build a rogue data center people will know consequences for violations.

432

We already did this with nuclear weapons.

433

We haven't eliminated nukes but we have prevented their proliferation to just nine countries.

434

Back then people thought this would be impossible.

435

Surely every country would have nukes.

436

Perhaps even thousands of corporations.

437

Maybe even millions of people.

438

But no, just nine countries.

439

And nobody has died from a nuke in 80 years.

440

Could we do the same with AI?

441

Maybe?

442

Maybe not.

443

Over time, AI will get cheaper and cheaper to build.

444

GPUs are harder to control than enriched uranium, but it would slow down AI.

445

It would buy us time to figure out what to do.

446

Okay, that's all 12.

447

Let me know in the comments which of these you think is most likely.

448

Which one we should steer toward? alarm bells over the artificial intelligence are deafening

449

and they are loudest from the developers who designed it.

450

The scientists and experts have called on the world to act,

451

declaring AI an existential threat to humanity on a par with the risk of nuclear war.

452

By the way, we don't get to not choose.

453

If we don't want that future, we have to pick a better one.

454

Otherwise, we can wake up one day in a world where superintelligent AI has taken over.

455

A scenario we go through step -by -step in this video about how an AI escapes the lab.

456

Hey, I'm Drew, and I really loved making this one for you guys.

457

Thank you.

✨ Рекомендуемое видео

43 предложений

AI is changing the world, but is it also trying to kill us? @RonnyChieng investigates #DailyShow

Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students

184 предложений

Что вы узнаете

Этот видеоролик поможет вам улучшить навыки разговорного английского: научитесь понимать быструю речь профессионалов, разбираться в сложных идеях и повторять интонацию, передающую напряжение или удивление. Также вы попрактикуете shadowing — технику повторения речи сразу после говорящего, что значительно улучшает вашу реакцию и произношение. И это отличная возможность учить английский по видео, смешивая интересные темы с практикой.

Слушайте за этими звуками

В диалоге часто встречаются связки слов и сокращения, которые делают речь более естественной. Например: "it's honestly crazy" превращается в "it's onestly crazy" (связка "it's" и "honestly"), а "if we actually use these" звучит как "if we actchually use these" (сжатие "actually"). Обратите внимание на редукцию "they're hoping for it" — здесь "they're" становится "they're" с мягким "r", а не отдельным словом. Эти детали помогут вам лучше понимать живую речь и говорить как.native.

Говорите как носитель

Чтобы повторять речь как.native, следите за ритмом и ударениями. В фразах like "the worst possible outcome" ударение падает на "worst" и "outcome", что подчеркивает важность мысли. В вопросах типа "right?" интонация поднимается в конце, передавая сомнение. Используйте технику shadowspeaks: включите запись, послушайте фразу, затем сразу повторите ее, копируя не только слова, но и темп и эмоции. Практикуйте каждый отрывок по 5-10 раз — и вы заметите, как ваша речь становится более естественной. Помните: практика разговорного английского через shadowing — это один из самых эффективных способов улучшить ваш уровень!

Грамматика в этом видео

Конструкции, которые говорящий использует чаще всего, с точными словами из видео:

Конструкция	В видео
Пассивный залог be + причастие прошедшего времени — важно, что происходит, а не кто это делает	will be left · being kept · is based
Present Perfect have/has + причастие прошедшего времени — прошлое действие, важное сейчас	have ever existed · has spent · we've discussed
Придаточные определительные who / which + предложение — уточнение о человеке или предмете	people who want · Island, which is · everyone who knows

Что такое техника Shadowing?

Shadowing — это научно обоснованная техника изучения языка, изначально разработанная для подготовки профессиональных переводчиков и популяризированная полиглотом доктором Александром Аргуэльесом. Метод прост, но эффективен: вы слушаете аудио на английском от носителей языка и немедленно повторяете вслух — как тень, следующая за говорящим с задержкой в 1–2 секунды. В отличие от пассивного прослушивания или грамматических упражнений, Shadowing заставляет мозг и мышцы рта одновременно обрабатывать и воспроизводить реальные речевые паттерны. Исследования показывают, что это значительно улучшает точность произношения, интонацию, ритм, связную речь, понимание на слух и беглость речи — что делает его одним из самых эффективных методов для подготовки к IELTS Speaking и реального общения на английском.

Техника шедоуинга: читать полное пошаговое руководство →

Практика Shadowing: MIT Explains the 12 Possible Endings for AI - Изучайте разговорный английский по видео

AI is changing the world, but is it also trying to kill us? @RonnyChieng investigates #DailyShow

A.I. ‐ Humanity's Final Invention?

How to Survive as the Last Person on Earth

Is the AI Boom Just Another Bubble?

What If Social Media Disappeared by Tomorrow

AI Just Crossed the Terrifying Line - Now What?

What Happens When Capitalism Doesn't Need Workers Anymore?

Could AI Become Too Powerful to Control?

Could AI Become Dangerous? The Real Risks Explained

‘We don’t have months’: Bernie Sanders sounds alarm on AI's 'extinction' threat

The Alignment Problem Explained: Crash Course Futures of AI #4

Are We Getting Too Comfortable With Claude?

Что вы узнаете

Слушайте за этими звуками

Говорите как носитель

Грамматика в этом видео

Что такое техника Shadowing?