3 ms·

"No [nuclear] bombs have been detonated for 70 years." That is wildly inaccurate. At best, no nuclear bombs have been detonated in anger for 70 years. A nucl

by venning 11y ago

"No [nuclear] bombs have been detonated for 70 years." That is wildly inaccurate. At best, no nuclear bombs have been detonated in anger for 70 years. A nuclear weapon was detonated during nearly every year between 1945 and 1996 [1], when the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty was adopted [2], over 2,000 weapons in total. Several nuclear weapons have been detonated since, though the rate has decreased [3]. If the author is intending to show how a group of dedicated, thoughful scientists can preempt disaster, this was a poor example. [1] http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Library/Catalog http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Library/Catalog [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban... [3] https://www.ctbto.org/nuclear-testing/history-of-nuclear-testing/nuclear-testing-1945-today/ https://www.ctbto.org/nuclear-testing/history-of-nuclear-tes... EDIT: The article has been corrected.

mazelife 11y ago
I'm not sure if you read incorrectly, or it the article was updated after your comment, but I don't see that quote anywhere. What I do see is: "Just as nuclear scientists developed norms of ethics and best practices that have so far helped ensure that no bombs have been used in attacks for 70 years, AI researchers, he urged, should embrace a similar ethic, and not just make cool things for the sake of making cool things." That said, attributing nuclear disarmament solely to "norms and ethics" of scientists is pretty reductive on the part of the author. In fact there were large nuclear disarmament movements in Japan, UK, and the US after WWII. It was as much public pressure as anything that lead to the Partial Test Ban treaty in '63. Similar movements in the 80's led to further reduction in arms. One million protestors marched in Central Park in '82, protesting the nuclear arms race. That's a staggering number and indicative of how widespread and popular the nuclear arms reduction movement was at the time. Comparing that to the "Anti-AI" movement—which just about everyone would agree is pretty niche—is problematic at best.
- venning 11y ago
  The article was updated. I have to imagine many people pointed out the error. Good observation on the disarmament movements. I wonder if "nuclear holocaust" qualifies as an "existential risk" for those who consider AI to be one.

by venning 11y ago

mazelife 11y ago

I'm not sure if you read incorrectly, or it the article was updated after your comment, but I don't see that quote anywhere. What I do see is: "Just as nuclear scientists developed norms of ethics and best practices that have so far helped ensure that no bombs have been used in attacks for 70 years, AI researchers, he urged, should embrace a similar ethic, and not just make cool things for the sake of making cool things." That said, attributing nuclear disarmament solely to "norms and ethics" of scientists is pretty reductive on the part of the author. In fact there were large nuclear disarmament movements in Japan, UK, and the US after WWII. It was as much public pressure as anything that lead to the Partial Test Ban treaty in '63. Similar movements in the 80's led to further reduction in arms. One million protestors marched in Central Park in '82, protesting the nuclear arms race. That's a staggering number and indicative of how widespread and popular the nuclear arms reduction movement was at the time. Comparing that to the "Anti-AI" movement—which just about everyone would agree is pretty niche—is problematic at best.

venning 11y ago
The article was updated. I have to imagine many people pointed out the error. Good observation on the disarmament movements. I wonder if "nuclear holocaust" qualifies as an "existential risk" for those who consider AI to be one.