We should push for a stop to even mentioning AI in these forums. There are exponentially more higher risk issues at stake for humanity… the world is a matchbox and you’re all giving it to kids to play with. No matter what you do or say, someone will work on AI somewhere. All it takes is 1 villain, and they have an army of programmers under them, because it’s just that easy to be bad today, and to make others be bad.
If you invested all your time on this subject, and somehow got 75% of the world to stop working on AI, 25% will still do it. And you know for sure more than half of them will be bad actors so what have you gained?
There is so much corruption in so many other ways imaginable, so much exploitation, where countries get away with it without the UN saying a word. There are still a billion of people living in poverty, tens of thousands dying every day, and you could have stopped it by stopping corruption but you are too busy thinking about AI.
My initial impression is that if 75% of the world was working on stopping AI, that would presumably include government and policy who could very well tell the remaining 25% that they can’t work on AI.
As far the infohazards of thinking about developing AI; I think that’s beyond what we can do. Ada Lovelace thought about AI in the 1840′s (https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/ada-lovelace-worlds-first-computer-programmer-who-predicted-artificial), and the possibility of massive economic gains is enough to encourage even a small number of people to continue working on it (and if fewer people are thinking about it, the competition is even smaller, thus the rewards much greater).
I do agree that there are awful things going on in the world, and ideally AI will be able to solve or massively fix those problems (on a scale that humans just aren’t able to).
We should push for a stop to even mentioning AI in these forums. There are exponentially more higher risk issues at stake for humanity… the world is a matchbox and you’re all giving it to kids to play with. No matter what you do or say, someone will work on AI somewhere. All it takes is 1 villain, and they have an army of programmers under them, because it’s just that easy to be bad today, and to make others be bad.
If you invested all your time on this subject, and somehow got 75% of the world to stop working on AI, 25% will still do it. And you know for sure more than half of them will be bad actors so what have you gained?
There is so much corruption in so many other ways imaginable, so much exploitation, where countries get away with it without the UN saying a word. There are still a billion of people living in poverty, tens of thousands dying every day, and you could have stopped it by stopping corruption but you are too busy thinking about AI.
I’m surprised no one commented in response.
My initial impression is that if 75% of the world was working on stopping AI, that would presumably include government and policy who could very well tell the remaining 25% that they can’t work on AI.
As far the infohazards of thinking about developing AI; I think that’s beyond what we can do. Ada Lovelace thought about AI in the 1840′s (https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/ada-lovelace-worlds-first-computer-programmer-who-predicted-artificial), and the possibility of massive economic gains is enough to encourage even a small number of people to continue working on it (and if fewer people are thinking about it, the competition is even smaller, thus the rewards much greater).
I do agree that there are awful things going on in the world, and ideally AI will be able to solve or massively fix those problems (on a scale that humans just aren’t able to).