4 ms·

I've only seen grifters, hysterics, or the ignorant talking about existential AI risk. A lot of people just nods their heads and go along, but I don't think the

I've only seen grifters, hysterics, or the ignorant talking about existential AI risk. A lot of people just nods their heads and go along, but I don't think there are many that have really thought about it (and understand what modern AI is) that really belive the risk. It's more like political polarization where people dwell on something they don't agree with to the point where they treat it as if the world is going to end because of it, instead of in context. AI is more like the political party they don't like winning, potentially undesirable from a certain point of view but they see it as "existential". I think it's important to see it in this light, instead of trying to actually debate the points raised, which are absurd and will only give credibility where none is due.

jefftk 3y ago
> I've only seen grifters, hysterics, or the ignorant talking about existential AI risk. Which category would you put Geoffrey Hinton in? https://www.utoronto.ca/news/risks-artificial-intelligence-must-be-considered-technology-evolves-geoffrey-hinton https://www.utoronto.ca/news/risks-artificial-intelligence-m...
- cristiancavalli 3y ago
  hysterics. Remember when he said we should stop training radiologists, that’s aged pretty poorly given there’s actually a need to have more: https://www.rsna.org/news/2022/may/global-radiologist-shortage https://www.rsna.org/news/2022/may/global-radiologist-shorta... https://mindmatters.ai/2022/08/turns-out-computers-are-not-vacuuming-up-all-our-jobs/ https://mindmatters.ai/2022/08/turns-out-computers-are-not-v...
  - mptest 3y ago
    So because he made one(+) bad prediction, all future predictions are inherently poor? It seems that may be a tad of a leap? Where is the line between "poor prediction" and "hysterics"? "Deep learning will replace radiologists within 5 years" isn't as inherently crazy as it probably seems in hindsight. Sure, it didn't pan out, but I know a vet who works for an Ai company classifying scans for training and he says first hand the models have gotten a lot better. That said, he's still not worried about being replaced.
    - cristiancavalli 3y ago
      When the prediction is so bombastic as to prescribe a near future without doubt and be completely wrong then yes, that would be hysterics in my book.
circuit10 3y ago
> instead of trying to actually debate the points raised, which are absurd https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone “Appeal to the stone, also known as argumentum ad lapidem, is a logical fallacy that dismisses an argument as untrue or absurd. The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation. This theory is closely tied to proof by assertion due to the lack of evidence behind the statement and its attempt to persuade without providing any evidence. Appeal to the stone is a logical fallacy.”

jefftk 3y ago

> I've only seen grifters, hysterics, or the ignorant talking about existential AI risk. Which category would you put Geoffrey Hinton in? https://www.utoronto.ca/news/risks-artificial-intelligence-must-be-considered-technology-evolves-geoffrey-hinton https://www.utoronto.ca/news/risks-artificial-intelligence-m...

cristiancavalli 3y ago
hysterics. Remember when he said we should stop training radiologists, that’s aged pretty poorly given there’s actually a need to have more: https://www.rsna.org/news/2022/may/global-radiologist-shortage https://www.rsna.org/news/2022/may/global-radiologist-shorta... https://mindmatters.ai/2022/08/turns-out-computers-are-not-vacuuming-up-all-our-jobs/ https://mindmatters.ai/2022/08/turns-out-computers-are-not-v...
- mptest 3y ago
  So because he made one(+) bad prediction, all future predictions are inherently poor? It seems that may be a tad of a leap? Where is the line between "poor prediction" and "hysterics"? "Deep learning will replace radiologists within 5 years" isn't as inherently crazy as it probably seems in hindsight. Sure, it didn't pan out, but I know a vet who works for an Ai company classifying scans for training and he says first hand the models have gotten a lot better. That said, he's still not worried about being replaced.
  - cristiancavalli 3y ago
    When the prediction is so bombastic as to prescribe a near future without doubt and be completely wrong then yes, that would be hysterics in my book.

circuit10 3y ago

> instead of trying to actually debate the points raised, which are absurd https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone “Appeal to the stone, also known as argumentum ad lapidem, is a logical fallacy that dismisses an argument as untrue or absurd. The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation. This theory is closely tied to proof by assertion due to the lack of evidence behind the statement and its attempt to persuade without providing any evidence. Appeal to the stone is a logical fallacy.”