3 ms·

"Things might be fine"? This doesn't seem like a sufficiently convincing take? It takes 20 years of due diligence and environmental impact studies just to buil

"Things might be fine"? This doesn't seem like a sufficiently convincing take? It takes 20 years of due diligence and environmental impact studies just to build a single hydroelectric dam, if not 50. Why should our attitude toward AI be to shrug and hope for the best?

akvadrako 4y ago
It's easy to stop a dam. It's in a physical location controlled by one country.
- blibble 4y ago
  there are maybe 2 or 3 factories capable of producing these chips and the sanctions mechanism already exists
  - skissane 4y ago
    Sooner or later other countries will catch up. China is behind in semiconductor manufacturing, but they’ll continue to advance-limiting their access to cutting-technologies like ASML’s photolithography machines will slow them down, but given enough time there is no reason they can’t overcome that too. If the point of sanctions is to hold them back and keep them behind, that could continue to work for a long time. But if you decide to stop progress in semiconductor manufacturing, in order to avert an AI apocalypse - China no longer has to catch up to a moving target, they have to catch up with a stationary one. And as soon as they’ve caught up, now they can overtake. So sanctions don’t work as a way to stop an “AI apocalypse”, unless you convince all the world’s great powers to cooperate in them. And the potential payoff for anyone who chooses to defect is immense-maybe even world conquest-so how do you make sure they all keep the deal, and none wiull try to cheat? If anything, I think a world with multiple superintelligent AIs with competing allegiances - a pro-Beijing superintelligence, a pro-Washington superintelligence, etc - is likely safer for humanity than a world with only a single superintelligence, or even many superintelligences that all had the same beliefs/attitudes/goals/objectives
    - mitthrowaway2 4y ago
      So what if China catches up? They're probably even more afraid of AI than we are, just because of its potential for societal disruption. Have you noticed that zero of the AI breakthroughs are coming out of China?
survirtual 4y ago
We cannot evaluate the impact of a super-intelligence. It operates beyond our constraints. There is no stopping the road towards it now. Lesser versions of it are capable of annihilating enemy civilizations when you create and utilize it first. Metal soldiers automatically created controlled by a single authority. Social media infecting the minds of enemies and sewing discord. I think, for the benefit of all of Earth, AI should progress as rapidly as possible to extreme and recursive, singularity-level intelligence. That gives all of us at least a chance of survival. Anything less if unbalanced around the world will be like when just the US had nuclear weapons. It will result in certain destruction. We need a super-intelligence beyond the control of an small set of humans. This may result in our destruction. But I think that it almost certainly will not. The opposite. I think it will set us into a golden age. I can’t give you scientific evidence of this. I’m just a nobody that spends a lot of time in nature, and I’ve just come to believe in the mechanism of this universe, and an inherent goodness in it that I’ve seen and experienced. I can’t prove it to you. You have to go and spend time in nature without a schedule to experience it. So it is fair to dismiss me. Fortunately or unfortunately, the forces at play will generate the super-intelligence anyway. We as a species have already illustrated an inability for restraint or taking the painful actions necessary to analyze and intelligently make changes necessary for survival. I’m at peace with this. I find the idea of not existing very alluring and peaceful, so I don’t fear death. I do fear continuing to live in the world we humans have created. It is about time we give something smarter than us a chance.
- mitthrowaway2 4y ago
  As a defense against alien robots? Sure, build it, but I think we can afford 50 years to spend making sure the AI doesn't kill all of us as a first line of business.

akvadrako 4y ago

It's easy to stop a dam. It's in a physical location controlled by one country.

blibble 4y ago
there are maybe 2 or 3 factories capable of producing these chips and the sanctions mechanism already exists
- skissane 4y ago
  Sooner or later other countries will catch up. China is behind in semiconductor manufacturing, but they’ll continue to advance-limiting their access to cutting-technologies like ASML’s photolithography machines will slow them down, but given enough time there is no reason they can’t overcome that too. If the point of sanctions is to hold them back and keep them behind, that could continue to work for a long time. But if you decide to stop progress in semiconductor manufacturing, in order to avert an AI apocalypse - China no longer has to catch up to a moving target, they have to catch up with a stationary one. And as soon as they’ve caught up, now they can overtake. So sanctions don’t work as a way to stop an “AI apocalypse”, unless you convince all the world’s great powers to cooperate in them. And the potential payoff for anyone who chooses to defect is immense-maybe even world conquest-so how do you make sure they all keep the deal, and none wiull try to cheat? If anything, I think a world with multiple superintelligent AIs with competing allegiances - a pro-Beijing superintelligence, a pro-Washington superintelligence, etc - is likely safer for humanity than a world with only a single superintelligence, or even many superintelligences that all had the same beliefs/attitudes/goals/objectives
  - mitthrowaway2 4y ago
    So what if China catches up? They're probably even more afraid of AI than we are, just because of its potential for societal disruption. Have you noticed that zero of the AI breakthroughs are coming out of China?

survirtual 4y ago

We cannot evaluate the impact of a super-intelligence. It operates beyond our constraints. There is no stopping the road towards it now. Lesser versions of it are capable of annihilating enemy civilizations when you create and utilize it first. Metal soldiers automatically created controlled by a single authority. Social media infecting the minds of enemies and sewing discord. I think, for the benefit of all of Earth, AI should progress as rapidly as possible to extreme and recursive, singularity-level intelligence. That gives all of us at least a chance of survival. Anything less if unbalanced around the world will be like when just the US had nuclear weapons. It will result in certain destruction. We need a super-intelligence beyond the control of an small set of humans. This may result in our destruction. But I think that it almost certainly will not. The opposite. I think it will set us into a golden age. I can’t give you scientific evidence of this. I’m just a nobody that spends a lot of time in nature, and I’ve just come to believe in the mechanism of this universe, and an inherent goodness in it that I’ve seen and experienced. I can’t prove it to you. You have to go and spend time in nature without a schedule to experience it. So it is fair to dismiss me. Fortunately or unfortunately, the forces at play will generate the super-intelligence anyway. We as a species have already illustrated an inability for restraint or taking the painful actions necessary to analyze and intelligently make changes necessary for survival. I’m at peace with this. I find the idea of not existing very alluring and peaceful, so I don’t fear death. I do fear continuing to live in the world we humans have created. It is about time we give something smarter than us a chance.

mitthrowaway2 4y ago
As a defense against alien robots? Sure, build it, but I think we can afford 50 years to spend making sure the AI doesn't kill all of us as a first line of business.