I think it’s not the point of your book, but you speak of AI “killing”, and reading your article I don’t see any sign of showing how AI has proved being positive & beneficial as of today. As your book is directed toward a wide public, you should show both sides (even if I understand that the point of your book is to emphasize on challenges), to debunk both AI hype and AI fear. Moreover, I think you’re impersonating (=personifier) too much “AI” (as you sometimes did in your (great) series of videos). When you say ‘AI kills’, I find it important too remind that an AI is only a function which makes a prediction from input variables, nothing more (even if it has big consequences, as you rightly say).
This is a fair point. We do not discuss much the global improvement of the world. I guess that we try to avoid upsetting those who have a negative vision of AI so far.
However, Chapter 5 does greatly insist on the opportunities of (aligned) AIs, in a very large number of fields. In fact, we argue that there is a compelling argument to say that fighting AI progress is morally wrong (though, of course, there is the equally compelling flip-side of the argument if one is concerned about powerful AIs...).
We should probably add something about the personification of AI. This indeed has negative side effects. But if pondered adequately, especially for reinforcement learning AIs, it is a very useful way to think about AIs and to anticipate their actions.
Hello Lê,
I think it’s not the point of your book, but you speak of AI “killing”, and reading your article I don’t see any sign of showing how AI has proved being positive & beneficial as of today. As your book is directed toward a wide public, you should show both sides (even if I understand that the point of your book is to emphasize on challenges), to debunk both AI hype and AI fear. Moreover, I think you’re impersonating (=personifier) too much “AI” (as you sometimes did in your (great) series of videos). When you say ‘AI kills’, I find it important too remind that an AI is only a function which makes a prediction from input variables, nothing more (even if it has big consequences, as you rightly say).
Hope you find this constructive!
Paul
This is a fair point. We do not discuss much the global improvement of the world. I guess that we try to avoid upsetting those who have a negative vision of AI so far.
However, Chapter 5 does greatly insist on the opportunities of (aligned) AIs, in a very large number of fields. In fact, we argue that there is a compelling argument to say that fighting AI progress is morally wrong (though, of course, there is the equally compelling flip-side of the argument if one is concerned about powerful AIs...).
We should probably add something about the personification of AI. This indeed has negative side effects. But if pondered adequately, especially for reinforcement learning AIs, it is a very useful way to think about AIs and to anticipate their actions.
Thanks for the comment, Paul!
Why do you think people with a negative vision of AI would be upset by you mentioning positive applications?