Is AI Really Going to Kill Us All?

0:00Welcome to the Carey Appet Show, your place for news, views and values you can trust and relationship insights you need. Now here's Carey Appet. Welcome to the Carey Appet Show, great to be together. We're going to talk a little AI today because everybody is. There is apparently quite an uproar because of an employee at Anthropic recently made a really high profile resignation from the company and his grounds were that the company was going too far, too fast, endangering the future of humanity. He could no longer work there in good conscience and his announcement seemingly sent shockwaves through this industry and even led to some calling for bands on AI. We're going to dig a little deeper into how that actually worked, how long did he actually

1:04work there? Is there something else going on? Because when you see everybody jumping on to something really quickly, you think, hmm, that's interesting. Why would these titans of tech be willing to seek the government's regulation on their work? That's probably the question that we should all be asking. The obvious question is AI safe, very few people know for sure and that's why it's a really important conversation. Is AI helpful? Absolutely. For those who know how to use it, those who know how to protect themselves, at least where it is right now, it's a wonderful tool if you're taking advantage of that. But there are those who are stoking fear, stoking fear so much that they are claiming that the government needs to intervene and that's where I raise a red flag and say, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, freedom and liberty for all including innovation and we do need to protect ourselves. So I gathered some articles for you, have some insights from some people that I think

2:09will help us out here. And in fact, starting out with just a couple minutes from the state of the day, Ashley Brassfield had some responses to this that I think will be helpful in our conversation. Let's listen. AI titans suddenly want to hit the brakes, but why? The biggest names in artificial intelligence are suddenly warning that AI is getting too powerful, too fast. And if this sounds familiar, that's because they seem to do this every few months. Anthropics CEO Dario Amote just published a 3,800 word essay warning that AI development needs to be slowed down before the technology becomes too dangerous to control. Yes, it's 3,800 words. We did it if you please, but we will summarize it quickly though. He says AI could eventually be capable of cyber attacks, bioterrorism and massive economic disruption. And he even warned that within six to 12 months in AI swarm could potentially take over the internet with a persistent botnet. And then came the chorus. Elon Musk said Dario is right. Open AI CEO Sam Altman said, I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier. Google deep minds, Demis Hossibis said, Amote's direction was correct.

3:12But here's the question. Are these companies warning us about a genuine threat or are the biggest players in AI trying to become the gatekeepers of the technology? Because Amote isn't simply calling for caution. He's calling for government regulation, third party evaluators, industry coordination and international cooperation. And that raises another obvious question. If the company's leading the AI race help write the rules, who benefits? And vice president J.D. Vance had a similar concern. We actually regulate smartly and we're thoughtful about the risk here. So there are obviously risks to AI. There are some benefits to AI. I have to say just personally, I feel a little bit weird about the fact that you have so many frontier AI tech companies kind of coming to the government and begging the government to regulate them. It feels a little bit to me like a bit of a Trojan horse. And there are legitimate risks. Anthropic says Chinese companies who allegedly use millions of clawed exchanges to train their own models through what it calls a listen distillation. But there's also an incentive for today's AI giants to make sure they remain the ones

4:13with the money, models and government relationships to decide what comes next. So a nice quick summation of the question that I raised as well, which is, why would they be doing this? And so I went hunting because if you listen to the politicians who of course jumped on this and this is fascinating to me, but it's not new, we have midterms coming up. The Democrat Party in particular need something to run on. Climate change is not working for them anymore because too many, too many stories have come out. In fact, I have more for you. I've been hanging on to bring to your attention. Yes, the climate changes. Is it existential threat that we were hearing for so many years that forced governments around the world to spend money on a threat that didn't exist? Yes. So now we have a new threat. And when you listen to what some would call fear mongering and I'm going to level set here and say, I think caution is really important with AI.

5:13Do you think we need to understand it? We need good people understanding it. But we need a freedom for people to innovate. We'll get back to that in a moment. But this existential threat and fear mongering leads people to say, oh my goodness, we could die in 12 years when all that was the climate change one. Right. So by the end of the decade is what they're saying. If we're not careful, if we don't put the brakes on, if we don't stop, who's we? And is it that they want power? Is it that they want to control? And I think that's always the question that should be asked why all of a sudden, why this now? And again, it doesn't take away from the very legitimate conversation that should happen. But put the brakes on the fear mongering because that is not helpful. And if you're listening to certain people who are who talking from this administration and even outside the administration, they're saying, no, there's caution. But what they're asking for is an immediate legislative action on this thing. Really? You've been going years without talking about now, but said that's existential.

6:16So keep that in mind. Let's go back to a little bit of history. Jeffrey Tucker does such a great job with this. And his article on this and the Epoch Times is fantastic. I will link you to it. He says he talked about the same employee that was mentioned in this high profile resignation. He goes into a little more detail. He says deeper forensics of the post that this former employee had. Raises some red flags. He was not an important player at the company. He'd only just recently opened an account at X. His first post was super viral and gained more than, listen, now, 150 million views for no apparent reason. So that right there is a PR plan, friends. That's just how that works. Okay. We know that to be true now. So he just opens an account, 150 million views. Possibly it could have been organic. I'm not saying it wasn't, but I say we raise a question on that.

7:19And of course, his post became the subject of a multitude of articles in the mainstream press nearly immediately. His code for somebody already wrote the articles and this was a planned push. Now it's not bad if they actually believe, listen, we need to bring attention to this, this potential existential threat. We need to get the proper attention. Let's all get behind it when he does this. You do that. Okay. That's fine. But let's go a little deeper into the story to see if this is actually what's happening. He began to grow that AI was making super bugs and bio weapons, which has been the case. I'm sure. And because we've had COVID and we have other things that the government did not tell us they were doing, people should be concerned about that. And he also mentions that AI was plotting the demise of the human race according to some of these industry leaders. Industry leaders did not deny this. Indeed, most of them seem ready to be regulated, even calling for the government to intervene. They're so good at what they do.

8:20They say that they're scaring themselves, regulate us, please. Exclamation mark. Meanwhile, open AI had already pledged to slow down development in the interest of safety. It is delaying its initial public offering on public markets to work on safety. It says, but this also conveniently allows the company to delay reporting its untenable financial position. And then, the topic is saying it wants government to have a stake in the company. Can you imagine a private company begging for government regulation and ownership? It happens. In fact, Jeffrey says it's a long pattern. So we might ask, what is really going on beneath the surface? It is likely that this relatively new industry is following the path of many industries before. And this is the part of his article and his insights that I thought was helpful, at least for me, to say, why? Why is this happening? And why does this also seem a little familiar? He says they're trying to get ahead of the inevitable regulation in order to dictate

9:25the terms. Okay, let me read that again. I think this is the key. This tech industry and these titans of this particular AI industry are trying to get ahead of the inevitable regulation that will come in order to dictate the terms. So to restrict competition with top players and embed themselves as a controlling power within the agencies that will be in charge. In other words, they want to win the game and make sure no one else ever plays it. And this is part of that corporate capture that Robert Kennedy Jr. has talked about. And we have lived with for a very long time. Think of all the other industries, right? Jeffrey says nothing surprising about this path. It's been going on this way for most of modern history. Let's start with the railroads. The railroads were the major backer of the Interstate Commerce Commission.

10:25The vaccine industry was behind the Biologics Control Act of 1902. The meat packers pushed for the regulations that came to that industry in 1906. And the largest banks and financial houses set up the Federal Reserve to become its own industrial cartel. The top computer and software makers were the controlling force behind the anti-trust legislation that seemingly targeted them in the 90s. Do you remember that? Bill Gates going to those hearings. And cultural historian Walter Kern summarizes the work, the way that this works this way. He says, most every big new American industry grows to a certain size and status and wealth and then cuts the government, basically the cops, right? They cut them in on the sweet deal in order to protect its turf, to scare off rivals and just relax a little with its dough. I think that means money.

11:27The industry does this oddly by harbing on the alleged dangers posed by the industry itself if it goes, quote, out of control. Sound familiar? Thus, pharma, big pharma, protects us from unsafe drugs. Hormel and Tyson from unsanitary meats and so on until now, when big AI proposes to protect us all from bad AI. It will even sponsor some, quote, going out of control to prove its point and secure its own advantages, he says. It may even let itself be broken up a little bit. Later on in the cycle, of course, it can always complain of regulatory burdens once it's fat and has its neighborhood to itself and feels like it's doing what it wants to and doing it the easy way. Now, how are you feeling about this, friend, because when I started reading this and reading some other articles that were raising the same kind of question of, wait a second, this

12:27seems a little too quick, too fast, all of a sudden, who was this guy, right? Yeah, so interesting, but I think history does teach us. These are really powerful truths about the history of regulation. And Jeffrey says it would make perfect sense that AI is going in that same direction. So this is his thoughts, he can't guarantee, this is what's happening. He wasn't in on the meetings, I'm sure, but it's important that we actually look at this. So I will continue. Another example of this, maybe more recently, is how the crypto and Bitcoin industry is pushing for legislation to control it too. Having been involved, and he's saying this personally, having been involved as early as 2013, I saw this developing in real time. Some people in the industry saw the innovation as a new and promising path to freedom. Other saw it as potentially profitable innovation, and it was that group that early on began plotting a regulatory structure.

13:27Now a decade later, all the pieces of the cartel were in place, while the early idealists and the ideals were actually pushed aside. He says, as I watched this unfold, I was grateful for a front row seat to observe how the administrative state actually gains power with full cooperation of industry leaders. And that helped me understand how the Federal Reserve came to be, and how the Food and Drug Administration arose as a beast that codifies poisons as safe and effective. The point applies to hundreds of these agencies and thousands of pieces of legislation. This is when I started to say to myself, okay, he's probably onto something here, and this is not good. This is not good. And yet it's part of the refrain of what we've been hearing, especially in the Maha movement. As I mentioned, Robert Kennedy Jr., we know the President of the United States is fully aware of how the three-letter agencies have been co-opted and how important it is to

14:28put power back in the hands of the people. Yet, it is the same President who has had all these titans to dinner because he wants the United States to rally together and become the powerhouse in AI to obviously beat China, that's always the first thing you hear. But to really to win in this race, we actually have to use all of the intellect and all the prowess that these people have to push it forward. And I think this is a really important time in our nation. I see, too, that I need to take a break. Let me just remind you, as I bring these things to your attention, the first thing I think about one is I don't respond well to fear, mongering, because I want to know what's really happening, because I'm a woman of faith. And I want to know the truth, and I can face the truth as you can. But second, we have power in our prayer. We are not victims. We are victors, and we are the very people that God wants to pay attention to these situations, these stories, these innovations, so that we can help guide them.

15:31What if AI is from him? And the fear mongers want to use it for evil, and he wants us to use it for good. Huh? Just a question for you. Hey, we need to take a quick break. We'll be right back. Do you believe your influence can make a difference? Every day, women of all ages are bringing wisdom, creativity, faith, and courage into their homes, workplaces, churches, and communities, and that influence is needed now more than ever. The influential women's forum is a national association of godly women committed to amplifying what is good, uniting like-minded women on issues that matter, and strengthening each woman's god-given influence in every area of society. As an IWF member, you'll connect with faith-filled women, gain access to exclusive online and in-person events, and discover meaningful opportunities to share valuable ideas and resources.

16:32It's time to push back against the negative and dark influences in our culture by shining a brighter light together. Visit influentialwomen'sforum.com to see the insights and encouragement your soul needs and to apply for membership today. That's influentialwomen'sforum.com. Amplify the good. True Beauty is designed for daughters and mothers, mentors, or trusted leaders to experience together. It's a wonderful opportunity to ask real questions, share encouragement, and build a deeper connection that can last a lifetime.

17:34Young women, you are not an accident or a label. You are a beloved daughter of the king, created on purpose, with purpose. Discover your true beauty today at thelegacyinstitute.com. Or call 425-354-8517. And now back to the carry-up show. If you've been paying attention to the news at all, you will have seen someone named Jacob Coxon, a software engineer who resigned from Anthropic and immediately embarked on a media tour. It all began on September 8th when he warned on X. People building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade. Quote unquote. A current employee at the Frontier lab chimed in to confirm that yes, he and many of his co-workers believed there's significant chance that AI will kill us all. The odds he said are perhaps greater than 10%. This is a part of an article that I will get back to in a moment from the free press.

18:35Because again, they go on to say this, these vague and apocalyptic warnings caused a fire storm online, including calls for AI safety regulations from the leaders of almost every major AI company. But there's a reason for skepticism, and not the only one, and neither is Jeffrey. And we'll get back to them in just a moment. So Jacob Coxon, there's questions about what he was thinking about, what he was actually trying to do. I appreciate people trying to bring things to our attention, however. But one has to wonder, how does this work? And I think the other thing I would like to say here is when you see a concerted effort in any kind of PR campaign, we've had a lot of sia up go on in the last 10 years, maybe well, longer, for sure longer. Now that we know that the narrative is always the thing that somebody is pushing a narrative. So let's listen carefully to the narrative. I can tell you that at the Legacy Institute, we're working with AI in a way that's so safe. You're going to be excited about what we're doing with it to bring people truth and

19:38God's grace. And we think it's an important thing for us to pay attention to on in that way. And I do think it's important we should understand the power behind it because if you've got somebody who is, doesn't have a biblical worldview, they'll take any form of science, soft or hard sciences, and use it to hurt people. We saw that during COVID. We saw it with the gain of function, things that happened in the labs. We know now people are doing things all over the world that are not what God would want us to use with our innovation. And so yes, guardrails for sure and and Godrails, right? I mean, we want him to lead us and guide us into all truths. Going back briefly to part of Jeffrey Tucker's comments here on this, he says ideological habit leads us to believe that government and industry are at odds. This is true as regards, I mean, if you're thinking about small business and farmers, including local companies that deal with the press of regulations and taxes.

20:40And then he goes on to say for industry leaders, it's a different matter. They favor these regulations so they can restrict competition in their own industry so they can stay on top. Some years ago, there was a debate about the future of the minimum wage. A top lobbying force for increasing the national wage floor was Walmart. People would cite this fact in defense of the increase without realizing they were giving the game away. Of course, Walmart would favor this because it can afford it. And it makes commerce more difficult for its competition. There's a new book by Patrick Newman, it's called Chronyism, The Rise of the Corporate State. And it exposes the long history of exactly this dynamic from the 19th century through the 20th century. At every stage of government growth, we find the hand of big business at work. It's the most thorough going effort to date to reveal the myth that the government is always a menace to business. As regards big business, it finds a working partner with big government. The number one goal of the AI industry right now is consolidation, maintaining a proprietary

21:41model of profitability and the restriction of competition. Its plan, he says, is to panic the public into crying out for the regulation that industry itself wants. Same as the railroads, the banks, the securities industry, pharmaceuticals, telephones, and media. And this is precisely why Milton Friedman once said that the most ferocious enemies of capitalism are the capitalists themselves. It sounds paradoxical until one thoroughly understands the history and the logic of this type of interventionism. And meanwhile, the pages of the daily newspapers, and I would say the digital online feeds, are filled with terrifying scenarios of what AI will do to us. Look carefully, he says, and you will find who and what is feeling this panic. It is the industry itself. And that should tell you something. Meanwhile, no one has any plan to deal with the actual threat of AI. We are raising an entire generation of students who have lost incentive to actually learn anything at all. This is his opinion, not mine, although I think he's right to some degree.

22:46Massachusetts Institute of Technology, you know what as MIT. It reports that its traditional study groups are gone. Office hours of professors are going completely unused. And according to some, this is actually terrifying. In a few years, the first generation of students will be hitting the job market, having been fed a steady diet of AI slop for years. He says, and they'll like understanding in the skills necessary to drive authentic progress. Now, I don't completely agree with that because I'm not a doomsayer. So I believe there will be people who will actually learn how to use AI. But he's not wrong in saying that the system and the way that the educational model is working right now is not to our benefit. He says this, no, AI will not kill us all. The real problem is not technological, but cultural. It threatens to make us all stupid. Okay. Yep. That's his opinion. I'm sure many of you are not going, that is a possibility. Nothing about federal regulation will stop this by the way.

23:48And this is why he brings this up because people talk about their concerns about the regulations. But it's going to be every family, every mother, every father, who actually controls what AI is happening when it comes to classroom and their kids. He says nothing about federal regulation will stop this. The control of AI will only happen classroom by classroom and home by home. It comes down to how we treat it and not what government does to regulate it. All history shows that when the government gets involved, there's always a hidden hand that belongs to the regulatory industry itself. And he's not wrong about that. And I found this article and I didn't read everything, but I found it to be so enlightening. As again, he goes back to history and says, Hey, we've seen this before. And that's important. Now another article I found for you at the free press is also very interesting. I mentioned it when we came back from the break. They talk about the fact that they felt Jacob Cox and this software engineer who created this firestorm that this seemed vague and it also seemed there was something that you

24:49should be skeptical about. They say the warnings from Cox and another's are infused with an ideology called effective altruism. EA. More letters. Let's just go with effective altruism. The term will be familiar to some of you. A few years ago it was the idea that crypto entrepreneur Sam Bankman freed said motivated him if you remember him. Sbf. You may remember he was supposed to be a good billionaire. He was to make a fortune with his company FTX and then give it away to protect humanity's future, especially from big existential risks. Same ideas, same words. You hear all this? Instead, what did he do? He stole billions from his customers and was sentenced to 25 years in prison. Now that didn't end well. Today the free press says EA is the unseen force driving AI safety discourse. This ideas and money course through institutions that are seeking to build and govern AI and

25:52with it America's future. And Americans deserve to know about it because the, excuse me, the effective altruism crowd is trying to restrict your access to the most important technology of the 21st century. And then this author goes on to write about Sam Bankman freed and the way that they quantify their, their actions, their movements, the existential risks, the language use so that they can control the movement of Americans and their ideas. And I found this to be intriguing. I'll link you to the article. How I'm going to tie it together in this last minute I have is to say this when an innovation comes out that can help everyone and people are given freedom to access that he used it and they get to use their ideas to create even more with it. That's a beautiful thing. So when you hear the top of the chain saying we want to regulate it, that's code for we want to regulate you away from having any access to maybe having great success with

26:53that particular thing. And that's why I'm raising the red flag to say I'm not worried about AI killing me. I, my hands, my life is in God's hands. I am completely comfortable with that. But I do want to ask the same questions you want to ask how could that happen and why the fear mongering and why the emergency right now? So raise those questions in your own household with your own friends. Maybe pass the show on to someone else so we can learn together. Amen. And number one job we're going to pray about this because prayer is powerful. Why? Because God is powerful. And we invite him into this situation. We'll see you next time. You've been listening to the Carrie Abbott show. If you'd like to listen again to today's episode or share it with a friend, simply go to thelegacyinstitute.com. And remember, the Carrie Abbott show is made possible by donations from friends like you. And of course, our text deductible. If you'd like to donate today, go to thelegacyinstitute.com or call 425-354-8517.

27:58That's thelegacyinstitute.com.