3 ms·
You are misreading the article you are citing. Quoting your article, "Contrary to misrepresentations in the media, this risk need not arise from spontaneous mal
by tsbinz 7y ago
You are misreading the article you are citing. Quoting your article, "Contrary to misrepresentations in the media, this risk need not arise from spontaneous malevolent consciousness. Rather, the risk arises from the unpredictability and potential irreversibility of deploying an optimization process more intelligent than the humans who specified its objectives." See paperclip maximizer. Even that is too narrow for the questions they asked IMO - someone who says that the development of an artificial intelligence will be "on balance bad" could be thinking that this AI would be in the hands of the 1% and so further contribute to inequality, even if it doesn't act unpredictably.
- luc4sdreyer 7y agoI completely agree with what you said, except for the part that I misreading the article. GP's comment is vague, it could be anything between "artificial intelligence will be on balance bad", and "the Terminator movie will happen IRL". My question was an attempt to clarify the statement and understand why it's reasonable to dismiss the idea as BS.