4 ms·

> How can this be in actuality prevented? By abolishing copyright and making crediting the author a habit. There is no way copyrights can survive the AI. There

> How can this be in actuality prevented? By abolishing copyright and making crediting the author a habit. There is no way copyrights can survive the AI. There is no way human civilization will let 200 year old legal practices hold back technological advancement.

b800h 4y ago
I think there's a strong case for arguing that we may actually completely ban AI and any sufficiently strong ML algorithm. AI hasn't even realised a millionth of its potential yet, and it's already running rings around humans (cf. algorithmic feeds driving political conflicts online). I think potentially it will cease to be tolerated and be treated a bit like WMDs.
- egypturnash 4y ago
  I am beginning to feel like the Butlerian Jihad may have had the right idea.
- Beaver117 4y ago
  First time I've heard that line of thinking. How and when do you think thatl happen?
  - b800h 4y ago
    Okay, so there's a sense in which AI essentially destroys knowledge culture by performing a reductio-ad-absurdam on it. Examples: 1) Social content. We start with friend feeds (FB), they become algorithmic, and eventually are replaced entirely with algorithmic recommendations (Tiktok), which escalate in an AI-fuelled arms race creating increasingly compulsive generated content (or an AI manipulates people into generating that content for it). Regardless, it becomes apparent that the eventual infinitely engaging result is bad for humans. 2) Social posting. It becomes increasingly impossible to distinguish a bot from a human on Twitter et al. People realise that they're spending their time having passionate debates with machines whose job it is to outrage them. We realise that the chance of someone we meet online being human is 1/1000 and the other 999 are propaganda-advertising machines so sophisticated that we can't actually resist their techniques. [Arguably the world is going so totally nuts right now because this is already happening - the tail is wagging the dog. AI is creating a culture which optimises for AIs; an AI-Corporate Complex?] 3) Art and Music. These become unavoidably engaging. See 1 and 2 above. This can be applied to any field of the knowledge economy. AI conducts an end-run around human nature - in fact huge networks of interacting AIs and corporations do it, and there are three possible outcomes: 1) We become inured to it, and switch off from the internet. 2) We realise in time how bad it is, but can't trust ourselves, so we ban it. 3) We become puppets driven by intelligences orders of magnitude more sophisticated than us to mine resources in order to keep them running. History says that it would really be some combination of the above, but AI is self-reinforcing, so I'm not sure that can be relied upon. We may put strong limits on the behaviour and generality of AIs, and how they communicate and interact. There will definitely be jobs in AI reeducation and inquisition; those are probably already a thing.
    - anigbrowl 4y ago
      > We become puppets driven by intelligences orders of magnitude more sophisticated than us to mine resources in order to keep them running What do you think corporations are
      - b800h 4y ago
        Well, typically not cleverer than most people, until you combine them with AI.
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  How are you going to un-invent it? Will this involve confiscating GPUs or criminalizing owning more than 1 of them? The thing is much like the problem of gun control in a warzone; weapons are just not that hard to make especially if you have a surplus of parts.
- unity1001 4y ago
  > we may actually completely ban AI and any sufficiently strong ML algorithm. Who are 'you'. The US, or maybe Angloamerican countries may do it. Many countries won't. Those who don't do it, will get ahead of everyone else.
  - b800h 4y ago
    At what cost? Perhaps the WMD comparison continues to work here.
pessimizer 4y ago
> There is no way human civilization will let 200 year old legal practices hold back technological advancement. Human civilization has kings and queens, and laws based on the sayings of ancient prophets. Instead of trying to figure out what "human civilization" will accept, figuring out what current wealthy capital-owners will accept will be more predictive.
- unity1001 4y ago
  Even if wealthy-capital owners get the AI banned where they can, the countries where they don't hold the power will get ahead by not banning the AI/

b800h 4y ago

I think there's a strong case for arguing that we may actually completely ban AI and any sufficiently strong ML algorithm. AI hasn't even realised a millionth of its potential yet, and it's already running rings around humans (cf. algorithmic feeds driving political conflicts online). I think potentially it will cease to be tolerated and be treated a bit like WMDs.

egypturnash 4y ago
I am beginning to feel like the Butlerian Jihad may have had the right idea.
Beaver117 4y ago
First time I've heard that line of thinking. How and when do you think thatl happen?
- b800h 4y ago
  Okay, so there's a sense in which AI essentially destroys knowledge culture by performing a reductio-ad-absurdam on it. Examples: 1) Social content. We start with friend feeds (FB), they become algorithmic, and eventually are replaced entirely with algorithmic recommendations (Tiktok), which escalate in an AI-fuelled arms race creating increasingly compulsive generated content (or an AI manipulates people into generating that content for it). Regardless, it becomes apparent that the eventual infinitely engaging result is bad for humans. 2) Social posting. It becomes increasingly impossible to distinguish a bot from a human on Twitter et al. People realise that they're spending their time having passionate debates with machines whose job it is to outrage them. We realise that the chance of someone we meet online being human is 1/1000 and the other 999 are propaganda-advertising machines so sophisticated that we can't actually resist their techniques. [Arguably the world is going so totally nuts right now because this is already happening - the tail is wagging the dog. AI is creating a culture which optimises for AIs; an AI-Corporate Complex?] 3) Art and Music. These become unavoidably engaging. See 1 and 2 above. This can be applied to any field of the knowledge economy. AI conducts an end-run around human nature - in fact huge networks of interacting AIs and corporations do it, and there are three possible outcomes: 1) We become inured to it, and switch off from the internet. 2) We realise in time how bad it is, but can't trust ourselves, so we ban it. 3) We become puppets driven by intelligences orders of magnitude more sophisticated than us to mine resources in order to keep them running. History says that it would really be some combination of the above, but AI is self-reinforcing, so I'm not sure that can be relied upon. We may put strong limits on the behaviour and generality of AIs, and how they communicate and interact. There will definitely be jobs in AI reeducation and inquisition; those are probably already a thing.
  - anigbrowl 4y ago
    > We become puppets driven by intelligences orders of magnitude more sophisticated than us to mine resources in order to keep them running What do you think corporations are
    - b800h 4y ago
      Well, typically not cleverer than most people, until you combine them with AI.
anigbrowl 4y ago
How are you going to un-invent it? Will this involve confiscating GPUs or criminalizing owning more than 1 of them? The thing is much like the problem of gun control in a warzone; weapons are just not that hard to make especially if you have a surplus of parts.
unity1001 4y ago
> we may actually completely ban AI and any sufficiently strong ML algorithm. Who are 'you'. The US, or maybe Angloamerican countries may do it. Many countries won't. Those who don't do it, will get ahead of everyone else.
- b800h 4y ago
  At what cost? Perhaps the WMD comparison continues to work here.

pessimizer 4y ago

> There is no way human civilization will let 200 year old legal practices hold back technological advancement. Human civilization has kings and queens, and laws based on the sayings of ancient prophets. Instead of trying to figure out what "human civilization" will accept, figuring out what current wealthy capital-owners will accept will be more predictive.

unity1001 4y ago
Even if wealthy-capital owners get the AI banned where they can, the countries where they don't hold the power will get ahead by not banning the AI/