4 ms·
Others siblings have good replies, but also, we regulate without physical danger all the damn time. See airlines, traffic control, medical equipment, governmen
by nwienert 4y ago
Others siblings have good replies, but also, we regulate without physical danger all the damn time.
See airlines, traffic control, medical equipment, government services, but also we regulate ads, TV, financial services, crypto. I mean we regulate so many “tech” things for the benefit of society this is a losing argument to take. There’s plenty of room to argue the elsewhere but the idea that we don’t regulate tech if it’s not immediately a physical danger is crazy. Even global warming is a huge one, down to housing codes and cars etc. It’s a potential physical danger hundreds of years out, and we’re freaking out about it. Yet AI had the chance to really do much more damage within a much shorter time frame.
We also just regulate soft social stability things all over, be it nudity, noise, etc.
- andsoitis 4y agoLet me recalibrate. I'm not arguing that there technology or AI or things that don't cause death should not be regulated, but I can see that might be the inference. I just think that comparing AI to nuclear weapons seems like hyperbole.
- actually_a_dog 4y agoWhy is it hyperbole? Nuclear weapons and AI both have the capacity to end the world.
- andsoitis 4y agoPrivate citizens and companies do not have access to nuclear weapon technology and even the countries who do are being watched like hawks. If equally or similarly dangerous, are you then saying AI technology should be taken out of the hands of companies and private citizens?
- actually_a_dog 4y agoFor the sake of argument, let's say yes, AI should be taken out of the hands of the private sector entirely.