“AI as normal technology” is a catchy phrase, and could be a useful one, but I was so confused and surprised when I dug in deeper to what the “AI as a normal technology” view actually is, as described by the people who coined the term.
I think “normal technology” is a misnomer, because they seem to think some form of transformative AI or AGI will be created sometime over the next several decades, and in the meantime AI will have radical, disruptive economic effects.
They should come up with some other term for their view like “transformative AI slow takeoff” because “normal technology” just seems inaccurate.
Thanks, Vasco.
“AI as normal technology” is a catchy phrase, and could be a useful one, but I was so confused and surprised when I dug in deeper to what the “AI as a normal technology” view actually is, as described by the people who coined the term.
I think “normal technology” is a misnomer, because they seem to think some form of transformative AI or AGI will be created sometime over the next several decades, and in the meantime AI will have radical, disruptive economic effects.
They should come up with some other term for their view like “transformative AI slow takeoff” because “normal technology” just seems inaccurate.
Fair! What they mean is closer to “AI as a more normal technology than many predict”. Somewhat relatedly, I liked the post Common Ground between AI 2027 & AI as Normal Technology.