4 ms·
I'm sure there's a benign explanation but it's interesting to see this story got downweighted hard. Compare the points and time since it was posted to others ar
by version_five 3y ago
I'm sure there's a benign explanation but it's interesting to see this story got downweighted hard. Compare the points and time since it was posted to others around it. Possibly because it's "AI" or because of the source?
Anyway, I posted the article, I didn't agree with a lot of it but I do agree with the main point that "existential risk" is a smokescreen that covers real issues. I'd argue that so is "bias" - people distract themselves analyzing if AI behaves differently across demographics as opposed to questioning how horrible the underlying process of algorithmically determining someone's fate is.
- janalsncm 3y agoThe article is pretty rambling but its thesis is good: automated systems are causing and will cause tons of problems. But those are practical problems, rather than the vague high brow problems. Problems like how can we deal with wealth inequality in a world where 99% of people are obsolete aren’t particularly attractive to a TED talk audience that paid $500/seat.
- hgsgm 3y agoSeems like an important topic. The billionaires don't want to be killed by their servants.