4 ms·

It is still quite possible they are morons, it's just less certain. Where did you read me saying that? I think ethical standards for AI should come from reputa

by aje403 9y ago

It is still quite possible they are morons, it's just less certain. Where did you read me saying that? I think ethical standards for AI should come from reputable CS PhDs who understand the technology they're pontificating about working in conjunction with lawyers and legislators and taking into account public sentiment, which hopefully will eventually be the case when this becomes more of a mainstream issue. The authors do not appear to have any of that background. I think the AI aistorian/philosopher/psychologist field belongs on the fringe for now and likely a very long time.

nkrisc 9y ago
I did not read you saying that, I was asking you a question. > ethical standards for AI should come from reputable CS PhDs who understand the technology they're pontificating about Should AI be held to different ethical standards than humans for the same actions? Given that we are beginning to see AI (proto-AI?) directly manipulate and interact with our physical world (autonomous vehicles, smart homes, etc.) I think it's a perfect time to study AI ethics in depth.
- aje403 9y ago
  Quote the entire sentence if you want to quote me there. I do not think "trained ethics experts" should fall into any equation whatsoever. There are enough of them in the middle east and deep south. We don't need them infecting the intelligent world anymore than they do already. The conversation should not be driven by an intellectual movement that is equivalent to a bunch of cavemen poking a coconut with sticks. As my post that you're responding to stated, this will enter the mainstream in a few years with a lot of unqualified people voicing their opinions. Hopefully the qualified people end up drafting the laws (note: not professional ethicists)
  - nkrisc 9y ago
    Now you've finally made your position and opposition clear: you believe "ethics" is interchangeable with "religion." I would not to work alongside an autonomous machine designed by someone who dismisses all ethics as nothing more than superstitious mythology. I think your view is a great example of why AI ethics should be examined by outsiders.
    - aje403 9y ago
      I have in no way equivocated ethics with religion or dismissed the purpose of ethics in AI, merely questioned who will be most fit to pass judgment while claiming them as a justification, however, it's now clear to me you're a idiot from that last post so I will not engage further. Edit: edited moron to say idiot
      - nkrisc 9y ago
        > I do not think "trained ethics experts" should fall into any equation whatsoever. There are enough of them in the middle east and deep south. We don't need them infecting the intelligent world anymore than they do already. The conversation should not be driven by an intellectual movement that is equivalent to a bunch of cavemen poking a coconut with sticks. I'm rolling my eyes so hard. Whatever did you mean by this? Don't give yourself too much credit, you've made no such point. You've merely called the authors morons and equated ethics and religion with cavemen.

by aje403 9y ago

nkrisc 9y ago

I did not read you saying that, I was asking you a question. > ethical standards for AI should come from reputable CS PhDs who understand the technology they're pontificating about Should AI be held to different ethical standards than humans for the same actions? Given that we are beginning to see AI (proto-AI?) directly manipulate and interact with our physical world (autonomous vehicles, smart homes, etc.) I think it's a perfect time to study AI ethics in depth.

aje403 9y ago
Quote the entire sentence if you want to quote me there. I do not think "trained ethics experts" should fall into any equation whatsoever. There are enough of them in the middle east and deep south. We don't need them infecting the intelligent world anymore than they do already. The conversation should not be driven by an intellectual movement that is equivalent to a bunch of cavemen poking a coconut with sticks. As my post that you're responding to stated, this will enter the mainstream in a few years with a lot of unqualified people voicing their opinions. Hopefully the qualified people end up drafting the laws (note: not professional ethicists)
- nkrisc 9y ago
  Now you've finally made your position and opposition clear: you believe "ethics" is interchangeable with "religion." I would not to work alongside an autonomous machine designed by someone who dismisses all ethics as nothing more than superstitious mythology. I think your view is a great example of why AI ethics should be examined by outsiders.
  - aje403 9y ago
    I have in no way equivocated ethics with religion or dismissed the purpose of ethics in AI, merely questioned who will be most fit to pass judgment while claiming them as a justification, however, it's now clear to me you're a idiot from that last post so I will not engage further. Edit: edited moron to say idiot
    - nkrisc 9y ago
      > I do not think "trained ethics experts" should fall into any equation whatsoever. There are enough of them in the middle east and deep south. We don't need them infecting the intelligent world anymore than they do already. The conversation should not be driven by an intellectual movement that is equivalent to a bunch of cavemen poking a coconut with sticks. I'm rolling my eyes so hard. Whatever did you mean by this? Don't give yourself too much credit, you've made no such point. You've merely called the authors morons and equated ethics and religion with cavemen.