4 ms·

We have no idea if we are Niels Bohr in the 1920s or Oppenheimer on July 15th 1945. We have no idea what the distance is between those two points, but again, th

We have no idea if we are Niels Bohr in the 1920s or Oppenheimer on July 15th 1945. We have no idea what the distance is between those two points, but again, the trend line of technology (and especially of AI tech) is that we should expect it to be a lot shorter than 20 years. If you have good reason to believe we're in the 1920s and not 1945, I'm open to hearing it. Additionally, it's not exactly self-evident that we shouldn't have stopped nuclear research at a more nascent level, and even if we accept that, it's not evident that'd justify introducing another looming technology catastrophe. By the time of the first nuclear detonation, yes, there was immense control already being exerted on all of the relevant ingredients. Do you disagree with the claim that AI technology, on its current trajectory, (i.e. not necessarily this generation of tech) has at least a small chance of yielding at least an extremely bad outcome?

bnralt 4y ago
The first laws regulating nuclear energy were signed about a year after the atomic bombings, no? As far as I know, the first nuclear fission experiments were completely unregulated.
- ethanbond 4y ago
  Were hundreds of millions of people interacting with nuclear energy and integrating it into every device in their vicinity? Very very few people are arguing this stuff should be stopped outright. They’re worried about the dynamics that will incentivize stronger and stronger systems while disincentivizing spending time on control/safety. I suppose you don’t have responses to any of the actual content of my comment, once again? Obviously no laws were necessary around a top secret weapons program that required expertise, money, and materials that no other entity could accumulate. The Manhattan Project did have, from day 1, civilian oversight by an elected governing body. And nuclear reactions had, up to that point, been controlled by default. None of these is true of AI development. Is there a reason you’re declining to answer whether you think there’s risk?

bnralt 4y ago

The first laws regulating nuclear energy were signed about a year after the atomic bombings, no? As far as I know, the first nuclear fission experiments were completely unregulated.

ethanbond 4y ago
Were hundreds of millions of people interacting with nuclear energy and integrating it into every device in their vicinity? Very very few people are arguing this stuff should be stopped outright. They’re worried about the dynamics that will incentivize stronger and stronger systems while disincentivizing spending time on control/safety. I suppose you don’t have responses to any of the actual content of my comment, once again? Obviously no laws were necessary around a top secret weapons program that required expertise, money, and materials that no other entity could accumulate. The Manhattan Project did have, from day 1, civilian oversight by an elected governing body. And nuclear reactions had, up to that point, been controlled by default. None of these is true of AI development. Is there a reason you’re declining to answer whether you think there’s risk?