5 ms·
What happens when sensible humans are no longer at the helm?
by EddieRingle 9y ago
What happens when sensible humans are no longer at the helm?
- burkaman 9y agoThis question applies to every organization in the history of the world. It's logically impossible to design any kind of social system that can't be ruined by people.
- noir_lord 9y agoBenevolent AI maybe? More Iain Banks "Culture", that's the universe I'd choose out of all sci-fi to live in I think.
- burkaman 9y agoI don't think AI really solves the problem. The question "What happens when sensible humans are no longer at the helm?" really means "What happens when people with different priorities are at the helm?" It's totally possible for a sane being, artificial or not, to take over Patreon and prioritize profit, or enforce their own values, or even shut down the site. The core problem is that you're interacting with entities you can't control. It's almost tautological; if you can't control them, by definition they can do things you don't like. I've only read the first Culture book, but I'm pretty sure the Idirans didn't feel like the Culture AIs were "sensible".
- erikpukinskis 9y agoAn AI would need to live a human life in a human body in order to understand what "benevolence to humans" means, and such an experience would make it functionally equivalent to a human with a cloud prosthesis.
- _puk 9y agoI'm thinking Breq in ancillary justice.. A large scale ship's AI reduced to a single ancillary, having to deal with humans on their level
- noir_lord 9y agoIs that worth a read? I know it won a bunch of awards.
- sqeaky 9y agoDo we need to live in the body of dog to understand "benevolence to dogs"?
- burkaman 9y agoI mean, probably, right? It's impossible to know. We can only be benevolent by our own standards. For example, the entire premise of the Matrix was AIs treating humans as benevolently as possible (in their minds) without inconveniencing themselves.
- komali2 9y agoActually I think the matrix example perfectly fits into the op dog example. The machines invented the matrix because humans would riot if the simulation was too perfect or too shitty, so instead it was made perfectly normal. The machines didn't care either way, they just wanted to prevent more random "wakeup" events that were caused when the world was unrealistic. So we can't know what is good for a dog other than what they tell us. Dog is biting us or whining, we're probably doing the right thing. Sure, you can throw in a bit of human empathy to account for the fact that we cuddle and pet our dogs, but we still know what they like based on what they're telling us.
- sqeaky 9y agoUnless you want to take into account their reaction. An upset dog will growl and bite. A happy dog has certain behaviors. It is not robust communication, but it does exist. In the beginning perhaps humans used dogs in an exploitative way, but many of the relationships now are mutual. Most dogs owners I know treat their dog as if it were "man's best friend", and they generally seem to reciprocate. The machines in the matrix wanted us for our value as a resource not for companionship and they certainly didn't respect us. I think exploitation and benevolence are opposed if not mutually exclusive.
- dave84 9y agoIf we did we might not keep them as pets.
- Banthum 9y agoFalse dichotomy. The question is not yes/no. It is a matter of degree. How angelic do people need to be for a system to work? If he had angels any system could work. If we had devils no system could work. The reality is in between.
- lr4444lr 9y agoAnd what's "sensible", anyway?
- jonny_eh 9y agoUse another platform for collecting payments?