3 ms·

That is strong AI argument. If strong AI happens, I'm not worried about income inequality, jobs, economy or anything like that. How world is for humans after t

by vlehto 11y ago

That is strong AI argument. If strong AI happens, I'm not worried about income inequality, jobs, economy or anything like that. How world is for humans after that point depends completely how somebody managed to program ethics and motivation into that AI. That AI probably can learn and modify itself, so the original designers probably can't even foresee what is going to happen. It's impossible to imagine something more intelligent than you. So any science fiction on the subject is bound to fall short. If we choose to be afraid of that, only real option is to go full unabomber.

ThomPete 11y ago
Long before we reach strong AI will it be affecting what we are talking about here. Just like no job require all human abilities no robot ai will need to be general purpose or self aware or strong by any metrics. There are plenty of alternatives to unanbomber not sure why you think think thats the only one.
- vlehto 11y ago
  >Long before we reach strong AI will it be affecting what we are talking about here. I see absolutely no reason for this. Evolution does not mean development, just adaptation. It doesn't really predict anything alone. Everything imaginable about hard AI suggests revolution rather than evolution. >There are plenty of alternatives to unanbomber What alternatives? You probably cannot control strong AI in any meaningful way if it can access internet. Going back to 80's isn't really full unabomber, but anyhow drastic measure.
  - ThomPete 11y ago
    You se no reason for what? That computers keep getting better? That technology keeps improving beyond were we are now? That AI will improve, that we have just seen the beginning of what AI allow us to do ex. trough deep learning. Really?
    - vlehto 11y ago
      I see no reason why computers getting better would fundamentally change the economy. They make everything more efficient, sure. But it's still about humans trying to gain resources at the individual level. And humans distributing resources to other humans at systemic level. Slave trade didn't fundamentally change economy. Except for slaves themselves. So until human is more intelligent than computer, things should remain the same.
      - ThomPete 11y ago
        Well of course you see no reason for that. You are looking at it from an economic perspective not a technological one. And so until you change that perspective you will keep applying the same ideas of incentives to your thinking. Humans wont need to either gain resources or distribute it. Instead some will just own those resources and the system that distributes it sans the humans.
        vlehto 11y ago
        You really wish to win an argument.

by vlehto 11y ago

ThomPete 11y ago

Long before we reach strong AI will it be affecting what we are talking about here. Just like no job require all human abilities no robot ai will need to be general purpose or self aware or strong by any metrics. There are plenty of alternatives to unanbomber not sure why you think think thats the only one.

vlehto 11y ago
>Long before we reach strong AI will it be affecting what we are talking about here. I see absolutely no reason for this. Evolution does not mean development, just adaptation. It doesn't really predict anything alone. Everything imaginable about hard AI suggests revolution rather than evolution. >There are plenty of alternatives to unanbomber What alternatives? You probably cannot control strong AI in any meaningful way if it can access internet. Going back to 80's isn't really full unabomber, but anyhow drastic measure.
- ThomPete 11y ago
  You se no reason for what? That computers keep getting better? That technology keeps improving beyond were we are now? That AI will improve, that we have just seen the beginning of what AI allow us to do ex. trough deep learning. Really?
  - vlehto 11y ago
    I see no reason why computers getting better would fundamentally change the economy. They make everything more efficient, sure. But it's still about humans trying to gain resources at the individual level. And humans distributing resources to other humans at systemic level. Slave trade didn't fundamentally change economy. Except for slaves themselves. So until human is more intelligent than computer, things should remain the same.
    - ThomPete 11y ago
      Well of course you see no reason for that. You are looking at it from an economic perspective not a technological one. And so until you change that perspective you will keep applying the same ideas of incentives to your thinking. Humans wont need to either gain resources or distribute it. Instead some will just own those resources and the system that distributes it sans the humans.
      - vlehto 11y ago
        You really wish to win an argument.