5 ms·
Ah yes the old "give everyone in the world their own nuclear weapon" solution.
by endtime 4y ago
Ah yes the old "give everyone in the world their own nuclear weapon" solution.
- RUN12 4y agoWhat, exactly, do you think would happen if western nations didn't have nuclear weapons?
- Zuiii 4y agoSeeing the geopolitical condition of those who have them and those who don't, I can't say that idea is without merit.
- endtime 4y agoI meant every individual person, not every country.
- detrites 4y agoThis is a really strained analogy. Nuclear bombs only have one - tremendously negative thing - they do, other than the one positive of the fact it's so negative nobody uses them, to avoid the same repercussions. AI on the other hand has a wide range of extremely positive applications, some of which have such tremendous life-saving potential it's almost ridiculous. Many, or most of which, likely might never be achieved without AI. The analogy is as ridiculous to me as calling personal computers in the 80's nuclear bombs because they could be used to hack and shut down the power grid. Yes, they could. And I'm sure some were scared of the prospect then, too.
- sensanaty 4y agoWhat "extremely positive applications" does ChatGPT have, exactly? From where I'm standing all I see is an infinitely deep and vast ocean of pure spam, scams and data harvesting on a never-before seen scale where megacorps like Micro$oft hoover up any and all data that they can, meaning we do all the hard work while M$ and similar corpos get to sell our own work back to us at a premium.
- detrites 4y agoChatGPT isn't the be-all of AI advancements. However, a model that can coherently understand and explain advanced topics to people in a tailored way, has huge educational benefits. Proper education is the core of every issue we face. A subtler aspect of this is the potential for cheap, tailored counselling. A few iterations and it will no doubt be possible to enhance the mental well-being of those without prior access, for comparatively little cost. Those benefits again extend into every area, crime and poverty being rooted both in lack of education and lack of social and emotional support. The social acceptance of chatting with an AI is important in this as it gets people over that mental hurdle. Localising chats so they are not subject to privacy concerns also advances benefits such as these. There's positive benefits to be found everywhere with AI, but they won't be if we don't envisage, look for, and develop them. And they need to be found for balance, as it remains true there are many potential negatives.
- kajaktum 4y agoThis is a very naive take. Out best psychologists aren’t using their expertise to solve mental health but to hack them. What makes you think people will use LLMs for good? It’s far more profitable to do bad with it.
- detrites 4y agoOur best psychologists cost significant money, and there are a limited number of them (effect and cause). Whereas no motive of profit is necessary to affect the changes I've described, that's the entire point and benefit here. Any single not-for-profit social health organisation, of which there are a huge number, could use a tiny part of their funding to fine-tune an LLM on counselling resources and case transcripts. It'd cost little, and only need to be done once. The major hurdle here, again, is education. Once such organisations realise how much more easily they can reach their goals using AI, they'll jump on it. The final obstacle is then social acceptance of AI assistance (growing now).
- IanCal 4y agoRestricting access to nuclear weapons is feasible, because of how hard they are to make on a larger scale, and even then it's very difficult. They are significant projects for entire nation states to undertake. Training a LLM is something random companies with some cash and servers are doing. So the outcome of "pretty much only we have nukes" is an option. I don't think that's a realistic proposal for AI. Given that, is the outcome of "more trustworthy people stop, others continue" a good one?