3 ms·
Because nuclear weapons definitely would kill us. AGI may also help us. Since we are not helping ourselves and will soon enough suffer climate doom, we really
by data_maan 3y ago
Because nuclear weapons definitely would kill us.
AGI may also help us.
Since we are not helping ourselves and will soon enough suffer climate doom, we really don't have anything to loose to go for AGI. It's the only rational choice right now, the logic is compelling.
(Climate doom sounds dramatic, I know, but it's a fact if you read the latest IPCC report and the Surround science.)
- pixl97 3y ago>we really don't have anything to loose to go for AGI There is no bottom to worse. I don't want to figure out how low that bottom is as my chemical constituents are being turned into paperclips.
- data_maan 3y agoBut you do realize that in 7-12 years [1] those paperclips will be lost in an extreme weather event?... [1] theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report
- shrimp_emoji 3y ago> Because nuclear weapons definitely will kill us I don't think so. Hurt us, sure. Kill us? That's bioweapons. ;) Wait until a Plague, Inc.-tier engineered virus inevitably escapes a BSL4 lab and gg. AI might count in that it might help someone engineer such a virus in their home lab. I hope we have offplanet population centers or posthumans by then.
- data_maan 3y agoAgain, no AGI needed for biowepons, malicious actors can do that today already. Perhaps not as easy, perhaps not as fast, but they can do it. What we have shown time and again though is that what we can't do is solve climate change. For that only AGI may help.