2 ms·

Came to say exactly this... Not quite sure how the author went from "Technology is, in other words, enabling criminals to target anyone anywhere and, due to de

by Jupe 7y ago

Came to say exactly this... Not quite sure how the author went from "Technology is, in other words, enabling criminals to target anyone anywhere and, due to democratization, increasingly at scale" to "One strategy could be a superintelligent machine—essentially, an extremely powerful algorithm—that’s specifically designed to govern fairly".

ctoth 7y ago
> Of course, this is a fantastical proposal. Even the real-world use of AI in the justice system is fraught with problems. But at this point, do we have a better idea for preventing the collapse of the state system under the weight of widespread technological empowerment? I'm not sure what motivated this sort of soundbite-style quoting without digging in further, but I hope if you first read the comments without the article you realize this is supposed to pose a question, not offer a solution.
- Jupe 7y ago
  I'm not judging the solution, just the logic that skipped from "Omniviolence" to the absurd proposal for an AI-based government authority. The two are quite unrelated in my mind. For example, the article made no serious mention of counter-measures such as string (which can down a drone), detection (RF directional antennae), or even just "plant more trees" (as trees make drone navigation more complicated - I know from personal experience). Just broadcasting random RF/VHF/UHF noise (there are only so many channels available) at drones can wreak havoc. Quite seriously, do a web search for "can you spot the source of a drone controller", and you will find a wealth of information from RF source detection, to the GPS coordinates of the controller (so the drone can "return home") - there a TON of alternatives that any "scholar" should research before even hinting at a doom-and-gloom alternative such as AI-based government.

2 ms·

Came to say exactly this... Not quite sure how the author went from "Technology is, in other words, enabling criminals to target anyone anywhere and, due to de

by Jupe 7y ago

ctoth 7y ago
> Of course, this is a fantastical proposal. Even the real-world use of AI in the justice system is fraught with problems. But at this point, do we have a better idea for preventing the collapse of the state system under the weight of widespread technological empowerment? I'm not sure what motivated this sort of soundbite-style quoting without digging in further, but I hope if you first read the comments without the article you realize this is supposed to pose a question, not offer a solution.
- Jupe 7y ago
  I'm not judging the solution, just the logic that skipped from "Omniviolence" to the absurd proposal for an AI-based government authority. The two are quite unrelated in my mind. For example, the article made no serious mention of counter-measures such as string (which can down a drone), detection (RF directional antennae), or even just "plant more trees" (as trees make drone navigation more complicated - I know from personal experience). Just broadcasting random RF/VHF/UHF noise (there are only so many channels available) at drones can wreak havoc. Quite seriously, do a web search for "can you spot the source of a drone controller", and you will find a wealth of information from RF source detection, to the GPS coordinates of the controller (so the drone can "return home") - there a TON of alternatives that any "scholar" should research before even hinting at a doom-and-gloom alternative such as AI-based government.