6 ms·

Well, now you are talking about philosophical questions. - Is pursuing an AI that kills 10 bad guys but saves 20 good ones overall bad? - Is pursuing an AI th

Well, now you are talking about philosophical questions. - Is pursuing an AI that kills 10 bad guys but saves 20 good ones overall bad? - Is pursuing an AI that doesn't kill anyone but pushes us to watch ads and lose our life on youtube overall bad?

fredley 8y ago
Can you really build an AI that can identify bad guys? What if it's a good guy in the wrong uniform?
- alehul 8y ago
  I think the argument is more so that the military killing 'bad guys' will protect 'good guys' in America long-term, if not civilians local to the country in question. Not commenting on whether that's accurate; just trying to better articulate what I believe is the above poster's philosophical argument.
- pnw_hazor 8y ago
  Then we can just do it Russian style. Kill everyone.
GenerocUsername 8y ago
- Yes : Directly responsible for death. AI is likely not the only means to have stopped those 'bad-guys'. - Depends : How humans choose to spend their lives is their own issue. Personal responsibility dictates it is each individuals choice how to live their lives. Youtube is not some resource needed for life.
MarkMMullin 8y ago
We only call it AI - creating an autonomous ML system that is designed to kill anyone can lead to us all being killed by math and plastic - it's a singularly bad idea, so much so there is no scoring mechanism that justifies it - too much chance we end up with this -- https://youtu.be/9CO6M2HsoIA https://youtu.be/9CO6M2HsoIA
- nightski 8y ago
  We will end up with that. Do we want to be as helpless as the people in that video?
  - MarkMMullin 8y ago
    I've done work in this space, and my stereo cameras are about to go airborne on Air Swimmers (Bruce the Shark :-) ) in my house. In the movie in the linked document its just looking around my office and showing parallax error - I have an app that lets it track, and I spent an afternoon trying to make it loose me - the only way I won was because I jumped from where I was, crashed into the toolchest, and fell to the floor - it actually tracked me successfully, what defeated it was the fact that I was using cheap servos and it snapped an internal axle on the cheap yaw servo when I hit the toolchest. We are helpless, there is no way around it, and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it except realize our survival lies in not going down this road. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/low-cost-high-volume-stereoscopic-machine-vision-sensors-mark-mullin/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/low-cost-high-volume-stereosc...
SahAssar 8y ago
I don't know about you, but I know that I do not want an AI "solving" the trolley problem in real world situations.
- lev99 8y ago
  It's unavoidable. Let's say a self driving car realizes that it is on an unavoidable collusion course, but changes in it's behavior (steering) will change where it collides. That's the trolley problem.
  - SahAssar 8y ago
    If I have understood it correctly in most self driving cars the actual AI/ML part is recognition of the scene/area, not deciding the action or outcome of such a situation. Either way this is one of the reasons I'm not wild about the crazy self-driving race.
    - cpeterso 8y ago
      An autonomous car must decide at every moment whether to brake, accelerate, swerve left, swerve right, or do nothing. Otherwise the car is not very autonomous. :) If it senses an unavoidable collusion ahead, it will need to choose from possible reactions that each have different consequences for the various people and property. Someone has to program or train the car what to value when choosing its reaction. The car will be biased, implicitly or explicitly, by the programmer's values.
      - sterlind 8y ago
        If you make the car flip a coin (perhaps a weighted coin, on the strength of the belief in its sensor data), you avoid providing a solution to the trolley problem. Alternatively, you can have the people vote on a self-driving car referendum, which specifies a DMV-enforced policy for the trolley problem. As a society we vote on such matters all the time. Nothing new here.
lev99 8y ago
> - Is pursuing an AI that kills 10 bad guys but saves 20 good ones overall bad? - Yes. If your philosophical development is to the point where there are clearly defined good guys and bad guys in your mind I suggest you read more.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- JeremyBanks 8y ago
  His statement doesn't really depend on the definition of "good" and "bad", as the logic only requires that the good people be half as valuable as the bad people, not more valuable.
  - lev99 8y ago
    Mathematically true, ethically dubious.
- colossal 8y ago
  It is relatively easy to define good or bad though. Telling black from white isn't hard. The problem is all the shades in between (where the majority of the colours are).
  - confounded 8y ago
    > Telling black from white isn't hard. Yes. That's kind of the problem.
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  Am I philosophically underdeveloped if I think it's pretty clear that 20 merchants and shoppers in a souk are the good guys, and the people with suicide vests on are the bad guys?
  - lev99 8y ago
    An argument that relays heavily on racial prejudice and emotional appeal is philosophically underdeveloped.
castlecrasher2 8y ago
> Will Google's AI push the fat man onto the tracks?
randcraw 8y ago
Google promised not to kill. Killing X to save 2X is still killing. Google did not promise to employ utilitarian ideals when deciding if the outcome of a new contract or product is good or bad. They said, "We will not directly aid in killing or harming people." However, I suspect this vow will invite challenges that question the redistribution of personal data Google aggressively collects to other parties, both advertisers and Orwellian governments. But I'm glad they spoke out nonetheless, since it invites closer scrutiny and upbraiding of the company by eagle-eyed social critics, who are all too often silent or ignored on these issues.
Maybestring 8y ago
>-Is pursuing an AI that kills 10 bad guys but saves 20 good ones overall bad? It's irrelevant. The swordsmith doesn't get to choose who gets cut down. Does anyone think it's possible to build autonomous weapons that can't be turned upon arbitrarily chosen populations?

fredley 8y ago

Can you really build an AI that can identify bad guys? What if it's a good guy in the wrong uniform?

alehul 8y ago
I think the argument is more so that the military killing 'bad guys' will protect 'good guys' in America long-term, if not civilians local to the country in question. Not commenting on whether that's accurate; just trying to better articulate what I believe is the above poster's philosophical argument.
pnw_hazor 8y ago
Then we can just do it Russian style. Kill everyone.

GenerocUsername 8y ago

- Yes : Directly responsible for death. AI is likely not the only means to have stopped those 'bad-guys'. - Depends : How humans choose to spend their lives is their own issue. Personal responsibility dictates it is each individuals choice how to live their lives. Youtube is not some resource needed for life.

MarkMMullin 8y ago

We only call it AI - creating an autonomous ML system that is designed to kill anyone can lead to us all being killed by math and plastic - it's a singularly bad idea, so much so there is no scoring mechanism that justifies it - too much chance we end up with this -- https://youtu.be/9CO6M2HsoIA https://youtu.be/9CO6M2HsoIA

nightski 8y ago
We will end up with that. Do we want to be as helpless as the people in that video?
- MarkMMullin 8y ago
  I've done work in this space, and my stereo cameras are about to go airborne on Air Swimmers (Bruce the Shark :-) ) in my house. In the movie in the linked document its just looking around my office and showing parallax error - I have an app that lets it track, and I spent an afternoon trying to make it loose me - the only way I won was because I jumped from where I was, crashed into the toolchest, and fell to the floor - it actually tracked me successfully, what defeated it was the fact that I was using cheap servos and it snapped an internal axle on the cheap yaw servo when I hit the toolchest. We are helpless, there is no way around it, and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it except realize our survival lies in not going down this road. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/low-cost-high-volume-stereoscopic-machine-vision-sensors-mark-mullin/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/low-cost-high-volume-stereosc...

SahAssar 8y ago

I don't know about you, but I know that I do not want an AI "solving" the trolley problem in real world situations.

lev99 8y ago
It's unavoidable. Let's say a self driving car realizes that it is on an unavoidable collusion course, but changes in it's behavior (steering) will change where it collides. That's the trolley problem.
- SahAssar 8y ago
  If I have understood it correctly in most self driving cars the actual AI/ML part is recognition of the scene/area, not deciding the action or outcome of such a situation. Either way this is one of the reasons I'm not wild about the crazy self-driving race.
  - cpeterso 8y ago
    An autonomous car must decide at every moment whether to brake, accelerate, swerve left, swerve right, or do nothing. Otherwise the car is not very autonomous. :) If it senses an unavoidable collusion ahead, it will need to choose from possible reactions that each have different consequences for the various people and property. Someone has to program or train the car what to value when choosing its reaction. The car will be biased, implicitly or explicitly, by the programmer's values.
    - sterlind 8y ago
      If you make the car flip a coin (perhaps a weighted coin, on the strength of the belief in its sensor data), you avoid providing a solution to the trolley problem. Alternatively, you can have the people vote on a self-driving car referendum, which specifies a DMV-enforced policy for the trolley problem. As a society we vote on such matters all the time. Nothing new here.

lev99 8y ago

> - Is pursuing an AI that kills 10 bad guys but saves 20 good ones overall bad? - Yes. If your philosophical development is to the point where there are clearly defined good guys and bad guys in your mind I suggest you read more.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
JeremyBanks 8y ago
His statement doesn't really depend on the definition of "good" and "bad", as the logic only requires that the good people be half as valuable as the bad people, not more valuable.
- lev99 8y ago
  Mathematically true, ethically dubious.
colossal 8y ago
It is relatively easy to define good or bad though. Telling black from white isn't hard. The problem is all the shades in between (where the majority of the colours are).
- confounded 8y ago
  > Telling black from white isn't hard. Yes. That's kind of the problem.
oh_sigh 8y ago
Am I philosophically underdeveloped if I think it's pretty clear that 20 merchants and shoppers in a souk are the good guys, and the people with suicide vests on are the bad guys?
- lev99 8y ago
  An argument that relays heavily on racial prejudice and emotional appeal is philosophically underdeveloped.

castlecrasher2 8y ago

> Will Google's AI push the fat man onto the tracks?

randcraw 8y ago

Google promised not to kill. Killing X to save 2X is still killing. Google did not promise to employ utilitarian ideals when deciding if the outcome of a new contract or product is good or bad. They said, "We will not directly aid in killing or harming people." However, I suspect this vow will invite challenges that question the redistribution of personal data Google aggressively collects to other parties, both advertisers and Orwellian governments. But I'm glad they spoke out nonetheless, since it invites closer scrutiny and upbraiding of the company by eagle-eyed social critics, who are all too often silent or ignored on these issues.

Maybestring 8y ago

>-Is pursuing an AI that kills 10 bad guys but saves 20 good ones overall bad? It's irrelevant. The swordsmith doesn't get to choose who gets cut down. Does anyone think it's possible to build autonomous weapons that can't be turned upon arbitrarily chosen populations?