3 ms·

You may be far better informed than many you're arguing with, but casual dismissal IS foolish. The biggest potential / likely issues here aren't mere capabilit

You may be far better informed than many you're arguing with, but casual dismissal IS foolish. The biggest potential / likely issues here aren't mere capabilities of systems and simple replacement of humans here and there. It's acceleration of "truth decay", accelerating and ever-more dramatic economic, social, and political upheaval, etc. You do not need "Terminator" for there to be dramatic downsides and damage from this technology. I'm no "doomer", but, looking at the bigger picture and considering upheavals that have occurred in the past, I am more convinced there's danger here than around any other revolutionary technologies I've seen break into the public consciousness and take off. Arguments about details, what's possible and what's not, limitations of systems, etc. - missing the forest for the trees IMO. I'd personally suggest keeping an eye on white papers from RAND and the like in trying to get some sense of the actual implications in the real world, vs. picking away at the small potatoes details-levels arguments...

ke88y 3y ago
I'm dismissing the survey, and I think you should as well. That's an orthogonal issue to actual x-risk, and I covered a bit more here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36577523 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36577523 > I'd personally suggest keeping an eye on white papers from RAND and the like in trying to get some sense of the actual implications in the real world I think this is excellent advice and we're on the same page.
- TedDoesntTalk 3y ago
  Where can I read RAND white papers on the topic?
  - ke88y 3y ago
    I think RAND was used here in the proverbial sense, not the literal sense. They generally do good work, stay away from hype while remaining relevant/timely, and focus on boring but real problems. Sort of that good spot in-between an IEEE Standards Committee and the press team for a VC/CEO/Influencer type. I think OP meant "that type of thing", rather than RAND per se. But in any case, there is https://www.rand.org/topics/artificial-intelligence.html https://www.rand.org/topics/artificial-intelligence.html

ke88y 3y ago

I'm dismissing the survey, and I think you should as well. That's an orthogonal issue to actual x-risk, and I covered a bit more here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36577523 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36577523 > I'd personally suggest keeping an eye on white papers from RAND and the like in trying to get some sense of the actual implications in the real world I think this is excellent advice and we're on the same page.

TedDoesntTalk 3y ago
Where can I read RAND white papers on the topic?
- ke88y 3y ago
  I think RAND was used here in the proverbial sense, not the literal sense. They generally do good work, stay away from hype while remaining relevant/timely, and focus on boring but real problems. Sort of that good spot in-between an IEEE Standards Committee and the press team for a VC/CEO/Influencer type. I think OP meant "that type of thing", rather than RAND per se. But in any case, there is https://www.rand.org/topics/artificial-intelligence.html https://www.rand.org/topics/artificial-intelligence.html