3 ms·
Fantastic paragraph: "The point is this: if you accept the premise that regulation locks in incumbents, then it sure is notable that the early AI winners seem
by henrysg 3y ago
Fantastic paragraph:
"The point is this: if you accept the premise that regulation locks in incumbents, then it sure is notable that the early AI winners seem the most invested in generating alarm in Washington, D.C. about AI. This despite the fact that their concern is apparently not sufficiently high to, you know, stop their work. No, they are the responsible ones, the ones who care enough to call for regulation; all the better if concerns about imagined harms kneecap inevitable competitors."
- kbenson 3y agoThe other way to look at it is that it's an arms race. Just because you believe something is problematic, that doesn't mean that stopping research into it doesn't lead into problems in its own right, and it can be hard to know what is the greater evil (but generally consensus has been it's better to be in control of that evil than to let someone else be in control of it and use it against you). I'm sure many of the scientists that worked on nuclear weaponry over the years weren't in a hurry to see their work deployed, but felt their country the more responsibly party to have that capability, even if just to keep level with others.
- lewhoo 3y agoIf such cynical people are behind such powerful technology then it might be the best argument for even harder regulations.