6 ms·

Interesting how quickly we are pushing ahead with obsoleting human cognition. It may bring many benefits, but I wonder if at some point this development should

by Sol- 4y ago

Interesting how quickly we are pushing ahead with obsoleting human cognition. It may bring many benefits, but I wonder if at some point this development should not be decided by society at large instead of a single well-funded entity that is in an arms race with its competitors. This endeavor is ultimately about replacing humanity with a more intelligent entity, after all. Might be that more humans should have a say in this. Such a more cautions approach would go against the silicon valley ethos of do first, ask questions later, though. So it probably won't happen.

ryanwaggoner 4y ago
I think it's always a mistake to hope that a business is going to not exploit innovation for their own gain at the expense of society. If we don't want this technology to have huge effects on society, governments will need to regulate it. I doubt that's feasible, but it's more feasible than hoping that Silicon Valley (or any other business) is going to just hold themselves back from releasing world-shaking tech that will make them trillionaires.
00F_ 4y ago
every other day i am reminded about the state of AI and i feel complete despair. why do people not realize exactly what you just said, that this endeavor is ultimately about replacing humanity? what other long-term result could the concept of AI possibly have? its like the biggest mass psychosis that has ever existed. whenever i talk to people about this, they always parrot the same thing almost word for word: people will just find new, better jobs. or, you know, something about the Luddites. its mass psychosis because they refuse to acknowledge the blindingly obvious and plain fact that humans wont be hired to do anything if humans are the worst at doing literally any task. and what are the consequences of such a world? people just draw a blank. its like the MIB came up and flashed them and they just go on with their day. i think the same is true even with you. you make this comment "so it probably wont happen, oh well." as if it werent an existential threat.
- cwkoss 4y ago
  Who's to say that humans have more moral value than digital beings?
  - ravel-bar-foo 4y ago
    By nature of being human and prioritizing my own existence and the existence of the people I love, I fundamentally believe humans (specifically these humans) have more moral worth than "digital beings." In fact, digital beings only have value to me insofar as they help humans and don't harm humans. I'm a human chauvinist, and proud of it.
    - cwkoss 4y ago
      That's valid. I think we could eventually make digital beings that are more moral than ourselves.
      - ravel-bar-foo 4y ago
        For that one would have to define morality. Also, the iterated evolutionary game theory of life supports the emergence of moralities among creatures which gain fitness by cooperating well to form groups that are more successful than individuals. It is not clear that digital beings will be cooperative social creatures.
    - leventov 4y ago
      It might be that humanity becoming non-chauvinistic about their value is the necessary thing for survival.
- wnkrshm 4y ago
  If the change comes too fast, who uses or consumes services? Will it all be another VC-ish run of: "We let people use our systems provided they help us make our service better" but for any knowledge-work domain in existence?
  - 4y ago
dalmo3 4y ago
There's no single entity that decided AI should become ubiquitous. Society at large has decided. Everyone who touches chatgpt wants more of it, and better. OpenAI just built the tool.
tim333 4y ago
Maybe we need a non-profit artificial intelligence research company whos goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. like OpenAI(2016) https://web.archive.org/web/20151222103150/https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/ https://web.archive.org/web/20151222103150/https://openai.co...

by Sol- 4y ago

ryanwaggoner 4y ago

I think it's always a mistake to hope that a business is going to not exploit innovation for their own gain at the expense of society. If we don't want this technology to have huge effects on society, governments will need to regulate it. I doubt that's feasible, but it's more feasible than hoping that Silicon Valley (or any other business) is going to just hold themselves back from releasing world-shaking tech that will make them trillionaires.

00F_ 4y ago

every other day i am reminded about the state of AI and i feel complete despair. why do people not realize exactly what you just said, that this endeavor is ultimately about replacing humanity? what other long-term result could the concept of AI possibly have? its like the biggest mass psychosis that has ever existed. whenever i talk to people about this, they always parrot the same thing almost word for word: people will just find new, better jobs. or, you know, something about the Luddites. its mass psychosis because they refuse to acknowledge the blindingly obvious and plain fact that humans wont be hired to do anything if humans are the worst at doing literally any task. and what are the consequences of such a world? people just draw a blank. its like the MIB came up and flashed them and they just go on with their day. i think the same is true even with you. you make this comment "so it probably wont happen, oh well." as if it werent an existential threat.

cwkoss 4y ago
Who's to say that humans have more moral value than digital beings?
- ravel-bar-foo 4y ago
  By nature of being human and prioritizing my own existence and the existence of the people I love, I fundamentally believe humans (specifically these humans) have more moral worth than "digital beings." In fact, digital beings only have value to me insofar as they help humans and don't harm humans. I'm a human chauvinist, and proud of it.
  - cwkoss 4y ago
    That's valid. I think we could eventually make digital beings that are more moral than ourselves.
    - ravel-bar-foo 4y ago
      For that one would have to define morality. Also, the iterated evolutionary game theory of life supports the emergence of moralities among creatures which gain fitness by cooperating well to form groups that are more successful than individuals. It is not clear that digital beings will be cooperative social creatures.
  - leventov 4y ago
    It might be that humanity becoming non-chauvinistic about their value is the necessary thing for survival.
wnkrshm 4y ago
If the change comes too fast, who uses or consumes services? Will it all be another VC-ish run of: "We let people use our systems provided they help us make our service better" but for any knowledge-work domain in existence?
- 4y ago

dalmo3 4y ago

There's no single entity that decided AI should become ubiquitous. Society at large has decided. Everyone who touches chatgpt wants more of it, and better. OpenAI just built the tool.

tim333 4y ago

Maybe we need a non-profit artificial intelligence research company whos goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. like OpenAI(2016) https://web.archive.org/web/20151222103150/https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/ https://web.archive.org/web/20151222103150/https://openai.co...