3 ms·
The article’s final paragraph: >”Every robot rebel has its benevolent counterpart, such as C-3PO in the Star Wars franchise or the android child David in Steven
by a_d 8y ago
The article’s final paragraph:
>”Every robot rebel has its benevolent counterpart, such as C-3PO in the Star Wars franchise or the android child David in Steven Spielberg’s 2001 film A.I. Artificial Intelligence. Both kinds of stories, the hopeful and the fearful, reveal to us our complex emotional responses to AI. Understanding these and their deep history is crucial to making the most of life with intelligent machines.”
The authors interchangeably use robots, automata, AI (meaning AGI, I am guessing) — that makes for a confusing read. If they mean AGI, then nothing about how humans dealt with robots will likely prepare us for how to deal with an exponentially fast learning, super smart, intelligence. I would argue that learning from history would be anchoring ourselves to wrong ideas (ideas of incrementalism). To prepare for AGI, we need to think quite differently and radically, in some sense.
- leoreeves 8y agoIndeed, I recommend Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies by Nick Bostrom, which explores this topic in great depth, including the control problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_control_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_control_problem
- Isamu 8y agoThanks, I will read this. I think in general the reasoning I see in this area is very poor. I think, since people have a hard time understanding their own intelligence, let alone sub- or super-intelligence, that they just project all kinds of human foibles onto it.