4 ms·

My most immediate though as I started reading this was... AI is like cancer. It's not one thing, it's many things, and anything that we believe will replace ou

by kurthr 3y ago

My most immediate though as I started reading this was... AI is like cancer. It's not one thing, it's many things, and anything that we believe will replace our brain power, or be put in charge of something large enough to be dangerous. At the same time ML, DL, and LLMs et al are all in use around us and some have been for years and decades. Whether it's simple use of Linear Regression, Principal Components, Nearest Neighbors, SVM, Random Forests, LS-TM, or now Transformers and Stable Diffusion it will find its way into hundreds and then thousands of products and tools used by many millions of people. It will hide in plane sight, until eventually something really bad happens, something that makes people fear it more than the quarterly profits it generates. I'm not really an AI fear monger. I don't feel like it's the biggest threat we currently face. It's a tool like internal combustion, antibiotics, debt based currencies, or nuclear power. I don't think we had a good idea how any of them would ultimately create challenges and require regulation or even create dangerous stability. I doubt we do with AI either even though we've had decades of books, movies, and video games warning us of various possibilities. We won't cure it, but maybe we can tame it. Will it be the garbage it generates, some other tools it lets us create, growth too fast for most people to cope, a band-aid that masks real solutions, I don't know... and I don't think anyone does.

LucioRAA 3y ago
Cancer is an exceptionally powerful analogy. The best I've yet to come across. Tools like AI won't save or improve the world, as it has never been the original goal. If it was, then, as one of the commenters above pointed out, we would've done it with the technologies/systems we already had. AI's goal to save the world is no more than the cancer cell's goal to save the host organism (it is not in its capacity to think that far, nor has it been in ours so far either). The goal is to maximize local gain, efficiency, power, and control. AI is yet another tool to make status quo more efficient. The problem is not AI; the problem is status quo. Thus, its cardinal applications will lean exceedingly toward militarization, state control, social engineering, propaganda, corporatism, hyperconsumerism, and further colonization of human and natural communities. AI just makes this so much more efficient. The result is predictable; this is how complex systems collapse. It will be fortunate if the collapse occurs before the technology is powerful enough to sustain the system semi-permanently, rendering any immune resistance ineffective until the host environment is eventually terminated. I think the future, if we are to have one, is not AI (or any other post-human substitute). The future is human. AI is a good indicator of the greater existential crisis that we are facing. Let's face it, we are fundamentally uncomfortable with being human. So it is a good wake-up kick in the butt for us. [P.S. I noticed an interesting trend on H.N.: the most poignant and thought-provoking comments are constantly downvoted and flagged. It may be a symptom of the echo chambers that have developed here. I wonder if some API could be developed to save those comments, as, with some exceptions, I find them most interesting and useful.]
- smaudet 3y ago
  I actually share your hope - I want the world to collapse before an insane AI or set of greedy VCs eradicates humanity. As for downvotes - I would say the OPs post again and then ask yourself if they would not downvote anything that doesn't match their marketing pitch. Some people are trying to build careers here and don't have time for pesky things like morality, or thoughtful responses if they can't monetize them.
- Nasrudith 3y ago
  Do any of those accusations have any actual meaning? How the hell can one colonize natural communities for one? Not to mention the blaring stupidity of "status quo = bad". Children dying of cancer is the status quo. So is you continuing to breath. It is literal insanity to throw everything into buckets of status quo or not and equating them with good or evil.

by kurthr 3y ago

LucioRAA 3y ago

Cancer is an exceptionally powerful analogy. The best I've yet to come across. Tools like AI won't save or improve the world, as it has never been the original goal. If it was, then, as one of the commenters above pointed out, we would've done it with the technologies/systems we already had. AI's goal to save the world is no more than the cancer cell's goal to save the host organism (it is not in its capacity to think that far, nor has it been in ours so far either). The goal is to maximize local gain, efficiency, power, and control. AI is yet another tool to make status quo more efficient. The problem is not AI; the problem is status quo. Thus, its cardinal applications will lean exceedingly toward militarization, state control, social engineering, propaganda, corporatism, hyperconsumerism, and further colonization of human and natural communities. AI just makes this so much more efficient. The result is predictable; this is how complex systems collapse. It will be fortunate if the collapse occurs before the technology is powerful enough to sustain the system semi-permanently, rendering any immune resistance ineffective until the host environment is eventually terminated. I think the future, if we are to have one, is not AI (or any other post-human substitute). The future is human. AI is a good indicator of the greater existential crisis that we are facing. Let's face it, we are fundamentally uncomfortable with being human. So it is a good wake-up kick in the butt for us. [P.S. I noticed an interesting trend on H.N.: the most poignant and thought-provoking comments are constantly downvoted and flagged. It may be a symptom of the echo chambers that have developed here. I wonder if some API could be developed to save those comments, as, with some exceptions, I find them most interesting and useful.]

smaudet 3y ago
I actually share your hope - I want the world to collapse before an insane AI or set of greedy VCs eradicates humanity. As for downvotes - I would say the OPs post again and then ask yourself if they would not downvote anything that doesn't match their marketing pitch. Some people are trying to build careers here and don't have time for pesky things like morality, or thoughtful responses if they can't monetize them.
Nasrudith 3y ago
Do any of those accusations have any actual meaning? How the hell can one colonize natural communities for one? Not to mention the blaring stupidity of "status quo = bad". Children dying of cancer is the status quo. So is you continuing to breath. It is literal insanity to throw everything into buckets of status quo or not and equating them with good or evil.