2 ms·

What I find weird about AI enthusiasts is that they’re addicted to forward progress while at the same time they must understand that it’s likely going to end ba

What I find weird about AI enthusiasts is that they’re addicted to forward progress while at the same time they must understand that it’s likely going to end badly. Even for them. It’s likely going to end at least in nearly everyone being jobless or dependent on UBI and eventually running from or being destroyed by rogue terminators the more we build three capabilities into robots. Because we’re building more powerful systems we don’t understand, we could be not only endangering ourselves and other living beings, we may also be endangering the AI too. I see developing more powerful AI like developing more dangerous nuclear reactors, we don’t do that because it’s stupid, but with AI we do it because we also have this strange belief it will just lead to better reactors and no other problems. I do think people must be quickly starting to see this now as a reality and course correct. This thing is like a nuclear reactor of information. Almost like opening a portal to an alien world. I’m wondering if it will get so wild we don’t see it as a good thing to keep investing in, like at some point the dangers really aren’t just theoretical, people start getting hurt, economically and socially, and as a species we just stop the billions of dollars of funding for it. I know people will say “you can’t stop people” but I think it’s more like, the majority of sane good rational scientists who you’d actually need to profess the field might no longer be into it.

CatWChainsaw 4y ago
It's the techbro variant of toxic positivity to believe this ends without significant suffering. >I’m wondering if it will get so wild we don’t see it as a good thing to keep investing in, like at some point the dangers really aren’t just theoretical, people start getting hurt, economically and socially, and as a species we just stop the billions of dollars of funding for it. I think this is more likely than that crowd things. They love gloating "adapt or die", but they overlook that any adaptation, including their own, will take place at biological speed, which they also love gloating is slower and inferior to silicon. But they're not going to be enhanced by Neuralink - they're just going to hit their limits of what they can accept, even if they hit their limits after everyone else. Of course, who knows how much there will be to salvage by that point.
- ChatGTP 4y ago
  That’s an awesome way to describe it, toxic positivity.
jddj 4y ago
Bit late to this one so maybe you'll miss the response, but I don't think the "we" in your comment is cohesive enough to decide to limit this. Eg. Sufficiently advanced AI obviates the economic dependence that the upper class has traditionally had on the working and middle classes for labor. There will be some, somewhere, already imagining that this is the path to a techno-utopia Disneyland where the few command all of the resources.

CatWChainsaw 4y ago

It's the techbro variant of toxic positivity to believe this ends without significant suffering. >I’m wondering if it will get so wild we don’t see it as a good thing to keep investing in, like at some point the dangers really aren’t just theoretical, people start getting hurt, economically and socially, and as a species we just stop the billions of dollars of funding for it. I think this is more likely than that crowd things. They love gloating "adapt or die", but they overlook that any adaptation, including their own, will take place at biological speed, which they also love gloating is slower and inferior to silicon. But they're not going to be enhanced by Neuralink - they're just going to hit their limits of what they can accept, even if they hit their limits after everyone else. Of course, who knows how much there will be to salvage by that point.

ChatGTP 4y ago
That’s an awesome way to describe it, toxic positivity.

jddj 4y ago

Bit late to this one so maybe you'll miss the response, but I don't think the "we" in your comment is cohesive enough to decide to limit this. Eg. Sufficiently advanced AI obviates the economic dependence that the upper class has traditionally had on the working and middle classes for labor. There will be some, somewhere, already imagining that this is the path to a techno-utopia Disneyland where the few command all of the resources.