Raw LLM Responses

I don’t want to sound like an idiot, and my mind is completely open to better information so please correct me as appropriate but, I see a ton of clickbait videos featuring Geoffrey Hinton. Every single time it is the most vehement doomer talk, AI apocalypse, the singularity, the end is near type of rhetoric. I have pretty much never been showed a video of Geoffrey Hinton that did not feature him parroting this position yet again. The issue is, after running into this clickbait content so much, it starts to lose impact and you start to perhaps consider that this is just some guy who has garnered a following and who is mostly concerned about grifting for money with their content as opposed to serving society as much as possible or advancing human understanding or knowledge in some sort of discipline. Now, to be clear, I am not saying this is my opinion on Geoffrey Hinton, I personally don’t feel actually informed enough to make an opinion on him. however, it is difficult to inform an opinion because content surrounding this guy is very polarized and It’s hard for me to verify what is said about him is true and what isn’t. Can someone with provably demonstrable understanding and knowledge in this area give me their (reasoned!) take on Geoffrey Hinton? Is he a doomsayer trying to get attention by pushing AI apocalypse narratives which people find interesting to sit and listen to such doomsday scenarios. Or, is he an actual father of AI as he is often coined in bylines, who genuinely has a deeper understanding of AI technology than the average layman and even than an AI professional and whose opinion we should actually hold with esteem and consider with caution the warnings which he espouses? To be clear one more time, I am not asking about whether AI is dangerous—it is clear that there are multiple aspects of AI technology that have deleterious risks and effects on human society and psychology so that is not in question in my mind. What I am asking is: is Geoffrey Hinton a voice that rational and reasoned scientific thinkers should respect and incorporate into their thinking, or is he another guy who we cannot verify his claims and who has no proof behind all of the things he says and who should be left to entertain credulous sheep on youtube who enjoy listening to doomsday predictions?