4 ms·

Actually, the inventors of the technology including Hinton and Bengio along with all the heads of the leading tech labs think this is not only not crazy but pla

Actually, the inventors of the technology including Hinton and Bengio along with all the heads of the leading tech labs think this is not only not crazy but plausible and imminent. I am talking about Hassabis and CEO of Anthropic and Ilya Sutskever. Not to mention other inferior humans like Hawking. Read on please. It's your kids future.

gumballindie 3y ago
No doubt AI is a powerful software tool. But as with any tool the level of danger is determined by those who control it and their motives. Naturally, if humans owners make it do bad stuff it will do bad stuff. Even a calculator or a kitchen tissue can do bad stuff in the wrong hands. Anthropomorphizing this type of non deterministic software ridicules their work a little bit because it shows the sleaziness of their marketing campaign in wanting to promote the product, all of which is centered around fear and theft. Usually that results in a well deserved backlash coming from those whom they want to hurt.
- arisAlexis 3y ago
  A higher intelligent AGI with specific goals can destroy humanity and that is precisly what Bengio (highest h-indez software scientist currently) describes in this blog post: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://yoshuabengio.org/2023/05/22/how-rogue-ais-may-arise https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=8997844...
  - gumballindie 3y ago
    I think some of these scientists need to retire with dignity. Claiming that software is somehow capable of action on its own is simply delusional. At first it was fun, but now it's becoming a nuisance.
    - arisAlexis 3y ago
      Fact: it's the current scientific consensus of the AI field. If you would like do some research otherwise keep your "expert" opinion,your life.
      - gumballindie 3y ago
        > Fact: it's the current scientific consensus of the AI field. You mean that ai can just go on its own and kill people? Certainly that can happen, if people are silly enough to give it such "power". Which goes back to what I said about using tools in bad ways. But some folks take it literarily, as ai is sentient and not a piece of software, and it will somehow make itself escape. Take computer viruses. They replicate, yet they are not treated like biological viruses. When they first appeared, the less sofisticated folks, did take ad literam. And that's where the issue arises. People take the "intelligence" in ai ad literam, along with the personification of this type of software. And the pushers of this notion need to take a break and retire early while they have some dignity left. But this doesn't contradict the consensus that yes, it can be used for negative outcomes, as can a kitchen towel or a flower.
        JoeAltmaier 3y ago
        Come on, an AI is different from all those things (towel, flower, tool) in that it can work with ideas and change it's behavior. Given any kind of power (and what's the point of using it if not to give it control over something) it can be a threat, or at least concerning. Is it conscious? Is it life? Dunno, don't care. Is it a concern? Absitively Posilutely.
        gumballindie 3y ago
        > in that it can work with ideas and change it's behavior. Dogs also work on ideas and change their behaviour, and their behaviour is much down to their training. But unlike ai they posses intelligence and can indeed, occasionally, go rogue. But AI is an object, it doesn't think, it doesn't create stuff, it is just a piece of software that does what it's told - well with plenty of errors, since it's not deterministic - therefore it's up to whoever controls it to determine how it behaves. Shifting the blame away with all sorts of looney stories meant to impress non technical people is amusing to a point, but after that point is dangerous.
- hollerith 3y ago
  Just because you decided to call it a "tool" (rather than for example a really powerful optimization process) and would prefer to think of it as a tool does not constrain what it might do. It's going to do what it is going to do regardless of what word you use to describe it. I'd rather not stake my life on the argument that "well, it's fair to call it a tool, and so far in history nothing called a tool has ever tried to cause human extinction."

gumballindie 3y ago

No doubt AI is a powerful software tool. But as with any tool the level of danger is determined by those who control it and their motives. Naturally, if humans owners make it do bad stuff it will do bad stuff. Even a calculator or a kitchen tissue can do bad stuff in the wrong hands. Anthropomorphizing this type of non deterministic software ridicules their work a little bit because it shows the sleaziness of their marketing campaign in wanting to promote the product, all of which is centered around fear and theft. Usually that results in a well deserved backlash coming from those whom they want to hurt.

arisAlexis 3y ago
A higher intelligent AGI with specific goals can destroy humanity and that is precisly what Bengio (highest h-indez software scientist currently) describes in this blog post: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://yoshuabengio.org/2023/05/22/how-rogue-ais-may-arise https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=8997844...
- gumballindie 3y ago
  I think some of these scientists need to retire with dignity. Claiming that software is somehow capable of action on its own is simply delusional. At first it was fun, but now it's becoming a nuisance.
  - arisAlexis 3y ago
    Fact: it's the current scientific consensus of the AI field. If you would like do some research otherwise keep your "expert" opinion,your life.
    - gumballindie 3y ago
      > Fact: it's the current scientific consensus of the AI field. You mean that ai can just go on its own and kill people? Certainly that can happen, if people are silly enough to give it such "power". Which goes back to what I said about using tools in bad ways. But some folks take it literarily, as ai is sentient and not a piece of software, and it will somehow make itself escape. Take computer viruses. They replicate, yet they are not treated like biological viruses. When they first appeared, the less sofisticated folks, did take ad literam. And that's where the issue arises. People take the "intelligence" in ai ad literam, along with the personification of this type of software. And the pushers of this notion need to take a break and retire early while they have some dignity left. But this doesn't contradict the consensus that yes, it can be used for negative outcomes, as can a kitchen towel or a flower.
      - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
        Come on, an AI is different from all those things (towel, flower, tool) in that it can work with ideas and change it's behavior. Given any kind of power (and what's the point of using it if not to give it control over something) it can be a threat, or at least concerning. Is it conscious? Is it life? Dunno, don't care. Is it a concern? Absitively Posilutely.
        gumballindie 3y ago
        > in that it can work with ideas and change it's behavior. Dogs also work on ideas and change their behaviour, and their behaviour is much down to their training. But unlike ai they posses intelligence and can indeed, occasionally, go rogue. But AI is an object, it doesn't think, it doesn't create stuff, it is just a piece of software that does what it's told - well with plenty of errors, since it's not deterministic - therefore it's up to whoever controls it to determine how it behaves. Shifting the blame away with all sorts of looney stories meant to impress non technical people is amusing to a point, but after that point is dangerous.
hollerith 3y ago
Just because you decided to call it a "tool" (rather than for example a really powerful optimization process) and would prefer to think of it as a tool does not constrain what it might do. It's going to do what it is going to do regardless of what word you use to describe it. I'd rather not stake my life on the argument that "well, it's fair to call it a tool, and so far in history nothing called a tool has ever tried to cause human extinction."