38 ms·
His position seems to be similar to MIT engineer David Mindell's, who recently wrote Our Robots, Ourselves[1]. It seems to me that the more hours one spends so
by amsilprotag 11y ago
His position seems to be similar to MIT engineer David Mindell's, who recently wrote Our Robots, Ourselves[1]. It seems to me that the more hours one spends solving real problems with AI, the less likely they are to believe an apocalypse is imminent. Conversely, the more dependent a prognosticator is on book or film sales, the more likely they are to predict or depict a near-term AI apocalypse.
[1] Google Talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nDdqGUMdAY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nDdqGUMdAY
- IshKebab 11y agoProbably because they are the only ones that see the hundreds of hours of work that go into making task-specific machine learning tools. We still are very far from a system that can really learn in a general way, but I guess it might not look like that to people that only see the result.
- samscully 11y agoI think the concern is less that an AI apocalypse is imminent and more that if it does happen, we won't see it coming and it will happen so quickly we won't be able to do anything to stop it. So it's important to try to avoid it ahead of time.