3 ms·
>All else being equal, not many people would prefer to destroy the world. Even faceless corporations, meddling governments, reckless scientists, and other agent
by ikeboy 10y ago
>All else being equal, not many people would prefer to destroy the world. Even faceless
corporations, meddling governments, reckless scientists, and other agents of doom require
a world in which to achieve their goals of profit, order, tenure, or other villainies.
If our extinction proceeds slowly enough to allow a moment of horrified realization, the
doers of the deed will likely be quite taken aback on realizing that they have actually
destroyed the world. Therefore I suggest that if the Earth is destroyed, it will probably
be by mistake.
https://intelligence.org/files/CognitiveBiases.pdf https://intelligence.org/files/CognitiveBiases.pdf
- lacker 10y agoI agree. But, so far we have come closest to destroying the world when nation states are stockpiling weapons of war, threatening mutually assured destruction, with their arsenals kept on a hair trigger. To me, that seems likely to keep being the main danger scenario in the future. It would still be a "mistake", but not the "oops what does this button do" sort of mistake, but rather the "I could have sworn they fired first" sort of mistake. That is why I think the main goal of AI safety should be how to defend against intentionally malicious AI. We should be thinking about drone swarms and hacker-AIs rather than paper clips.
- Retric 10y agoOne nation already went nuclear > non nuclear demonstrating a level of basic competence.