4 ms·
We have a very poor record. Slavery is old yet still with us (and not isolated to "barbaric" cultures, like we tell ourselves). We treat animals horrifically.
by latch 10y ago
We have a very poor record.
Slavery is old yet still with us (and not isolated to "barbaric" cultures, like we tell ourselves).
We treat animals horrifically.
If past (and present) action is any indication, it seems inevitable that we'll abuse AI. The difference being that while the seamstress, farmers and cattle can't stand against our might, AI could. And we'd probably deserve it.
- tempodox 10y agoYou're being too optimistic, I'm afraid. When AI will “stand against our might”, the serves-us-right angle will be of little consolation.
- tarpherder 10y agoWe'll still have created A.I. which successfully made us obsolete so there's that. It's progress, just different. Why prefer a human future over an A.I. future? Isn't the point of A.I. to make something that can rival us? We'll die anyway, I'd be kind of proud to die to the next great step in our timeline personally, rather than die of old age.
- tremon 10y agoWe'll still have created A.I. which successfully made us obsolete AI itself won't obsolete us. It is my understanding that AI is purely virtual, and can't interact with nature except through agents. For us to be "obsolete", AI needs full production capability to build its own agents, and control the entire production/construction/repair pipeline. In my view, that's quite a few steps further than simply "AI". An AI with reproductive capability will enslave us before it obsoletes us. And an AI may well decide that human slaves are cheaper (or more useful/versatile) than agents that it can build itself.
- allengeorge 10y agoWell, I don't think of that as our "next great step" at all, so there's that. Not disputing that it'll happen sometime, BTW - I just don't see this as some great good thing.