3 ms·

> “I decided to shout fire,” he told a packed lecture hall. “I don’t know what to do about it or which way to run.” Is it really that much of a threat to huma

> “I decided to shout fire,” he told a packed lecture hall. “I don’t know what to do about it or which way to run.” Is it really that much of a threat to humanity? Here is how we can save humanity: 1. Every AI researcher must be rounded up and locked in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives. 2. NVidia, AMD, Apple, Google and other companies making GPU/TPU should be immediately seized. 3. Samsung, Intel, and TSMC fabs must be destroyed worldwide If AI is really the threat that these people are saying it is - an existential threat, these actions are the only reasonable response. Then again, maybe these people warning are actually engaging in hyperbole and don't actually really believe it is as bad as they say.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
> If AI is really the threat that these people are saying it is - an existential threat, these actions are the only reasonable response. And that's exactly what some of them have been saying. But they also know that this plan of yours is impossible in practice. Much like with climate change, and most other ongoing problems of our time, this too has an easy solution, and is an issue only because humans are unable to coordinate at scale to implement that solution.
bibanez 3y ago
Humans can walk head on into disaster without even trying to avoid it. Look at WWI and WWII. The relevant players can act recklessly while the rest of us realistically remain powerless.
NumberWangMan 3y ago
I think... flipping it around a bit, for this to be a reasonable response, then it must be a grave threat to humanity, and you want to be really sure. It's rational to be wary of beliefs that lead you to drastic actions like this, as people have done bad things in history in the name of fear. But it's also very possible that such an instinct, to doubt yourself, could be what dooms us. I really don't want it to be true, that AI is such a threat that drastic action like you mentioned is necessary (probably minus the solitary confinement thing for AI researchers -- if you can control the chips, and give them a stern warning not to do AI research backed up by penalties, we're probably fine). It's terrifying if we're facing something that will end us, and the only option is to essentially go scorched earth on computers. People will naturally recoil from the idea that AI is such a threat, BECAUSE it would warrant an extreme response. Regardless of whether it is actually a threat or not. If AI does not have the potential to doom us, that's great. If we take drastic action and it wasn't going to doom us, however, that's very regrettable--this is what most of us worry about. But if it does pose an extinction threat, and we don't take it seriously, that's even more regrettable. I think the latter option is far more likely at this point, just based on human nature and our tendency to poke the bear. I've basically reached the point where I don't know what I could possibly do, and I'm pretty much shut down. I'm trying very hard every day not to think about this, but as you can see from the fact that I'm typing about this, I don't always succeed. I'm just trying to enjoy what may be the last few years I have left with my family before the world goes nuts. But anyway, except for punishing people unnecessarily as I mentioned above, I think that what you suggested is reasonable.
rc5150 3y ago
I don't think AI turning into Skynet is the problem, with a robot uprising and creepy titanium endoskeletons shooting laser cannons. The fallout of human response to the societal impacts of AI's adoption by humanity seems a more likely scenario. Misinformation leading to increased mental health crises as the populace loses the ability to distinguish fact from fiction, job automation and human displacement, further class divide, etc. etc. TL;DR: AI is not the threat, it's the tool. Humanity using the tool is the threat.
gumballindie 3y ago
> Is it really that much of a threat to humanity? The real threat is society ignoring the ongoing mental health epidemic.

TeMPOraL 3y ago

> If AI is really the threat that these people are saying it is - an existential threat, these actions are the only reasonable response. And that's exactly what some of them have been saying. But they also know that this plan of yours is impossible in practice. Much like with climate change, and most other ongoing problems of our time, this too has an easy solution, and is an issue only because humans are unable to coordinate at scale to implement that solution.

bibanez 3y ago

Humans can walk head on into disaster without even trying to avoid it. Look at WWI and WWII. The relevant players can act recklessly while the rest of us realistically remain powerless.

NumberWangMan 3y ago

I think... flipping it around a bit, for this to be a reasonable response, then it must be a grave threat to humanity, and you want to be really sure. It's rational to be wary of beliefs that lead you to drastic actions like this, as people have done bad things in history in the name of fear. But it's also very possible that such an instinct, to doubt yourself, could be what dooms us. I really don't want it to be true, that AI is such a threat that drastic action like you mentioned is necessary (probably minus the solitary confinement thing for AI researchers -- if you can control the chips, and give them a stern warning not to do AI research backed up by penalties, we're probably fine). It's terrifying if we're facing something that will end us, and the only option is to essentially go scorched earth on computers. People will naturally recoil from the idea that AI is such a threat, BECAUSE it would warrant an extreme response. Regardless of whether it is actually a threat or not. If AI does not have the potential to doom us, that's great. If we take drastic action and it wasn't going to doom us, however, that's very regrettable--this is what most of us worry about. But if it does pose an extinction threat, and we don't take it seriously, that's even more regrettable. I think the latter option is far more likely at this point, just based on human nature and our tendency to poke the bear. I've basically reached the point where I don't know what I could possibly do, and I'm pretty much shut down. I'm trying very hard every day not to think about this, but as you can see from the fact that I'm typing about this, I don't always succeed. I'm just trying to enjoy what may be the last few years I have left with my family before the world goes nuts. But anyway, except for punishing people unnecessarily as I mentioned above, I think that what you suggested is reasonable.

rc5150 3y ago

I don't think AI turning into Skynet is the problem, with a robot uprising and creepy titanium endoskeletons shooting laser cannons. The fallout of human response to the societal impacts of AI's adoption by humanity seems a more likely scenario. Misinformation leading to increased mental health crises as the populace loses the ability to distinguish fact from fiction, job automation and human displacement, further class divide, etc. etc. TL;DR: AI is not the threat, it's the tool. Humanity using the tool is the threat.

gumballindie 3y ago

> Is it really that much of a threat to humanity? The real threat is society ignoring the ongoing mental health epidemic.