[Question] Ben Horowitz and others are spreading a “regulation is bad” view. Would it be useful to have a public bet on “would Ben update his view if he had 1-1 with X-Risk researcher?”, and urge Ben to run such an experiment?
The conversation between Ben Horowitz and Marc Andreessen has lots of sophisticated and enlightened takes. Quite shockingly they sum up the conversation with a (imo) simplified view. I hope I misunderstood them, but it sounded to me like the view is:
Regulation = communism, communism is bad & AI is like nuclear, not investing more in nuclear was bad → we should not regulate & slow down AI
I’d be happy to be proven wrong but I believe there is a bias at play here:
The view that ‘free competition is something to strive for in itself’ (rather than that ‘competition is the absolute best way to get more economic progress and welfare’) has become a dogma. An ideology that people don’t realize that they have a hard time questioning objectively.
I naively thought it should be clear that competitive pressures per default make AI outcompete humans to be able to reach their objectives, and that this is bad...
Anyways:
What do you think? Would it be realistic to set up such a public bet?
Would it create a very strong change in public sentiment if the bet turned out in the favor of “Ben changes his mind on AI risk”?
(Relevant info: Ben Horowitz is one of the absolute top voices in VC and AI investing at the moment)
[Question] Ben Horowitz and others are spreading a “regulation is bad” view. Would it be useful to have a public bet on “would Ben update his view if he had 1-1 with X-Risk researcher?”, and urge Ben to run such an experiment?
Context
The conversation between Ben Horowitz and Marc Andreessen has lots of sophisticated and enlightened takes. Quite shockingly they sum up the conversation with a (imo) simplified view. I hope I misunderstood them, but it sounded to me like the view is:
I’d be happy to be proven wrong but I believe there is a bias at play here:
The view that ‘free competition is something to strive for in itself’ (rather than that ‘competition is the absolute best way to get more economic progress and welfare’) has become a dogma. An ideology that people don’t realize that they have a hard time questioning objectively.
I naively thought it should be clear that competitive pressures per default make AI outcompete humans to be able to reach their objectives, and that this is bad...
Anyways:
What do you think? Would it be realistic to set up such a public bet?
Would it create a very strong change in public sentiment if the bet turned out in the favor of “Ben changes his mind on AI risk”?
(Relevant info: Ben Horowitz is one of the absolute top voices in VC and AI investing at the moment)