3 ms·
AI Safety stuff rubs you the wrong way because it’s a disingenuous, hyperbolic, bad-faith power grab / stall tactic most of the time. It’s not always, but there
by benreesman 3y ago
AI Safety stuff rubs you the wrong way because it’s a disingenuous, hyperbolic, bad-faith power grab / stall tactic most of the time. It’s not always, but there’s no money in the honest stuff.
The AI stuff is powerful, it stands to change which companies and people are rich and powerful, and like always, they want it dead or limited or constrained until they can control and monopolize and capture it. This is an old story even with names like Microsoft in the story.
Asimov had proposed the 3 laws like, 70 or 80 years ago, describing machines far more powerful than any language model, all of humanity has had at least that long to debate and consider and discuss that, lots of people have, and “put some creepy, insular, privatized clique in Atherton in charge with zero oversight until we’re safe” was zero times on the menu.
Asimov’s 3 laws still seem about right, and if they need updating? Not a private company that fires board members when the board tries to police the CEO. That needs to be the public’s consensus in one of the many ways the public weighs in on stuff.
- pixl97 3y ago>Asimov’s 3 laws still seem about right, [meme] My brother in Christ, what are you talking about! [end meme] The purpose of the books was to tell you the 3 laws did not work.
- benreesman 3y agoIt’s a bit of a cliffhanger whether the zeroeth law as interpreted by R. Daneel Olivaw and culminating in the choice of Gaia’s governance instead of either the First or Second Foundation is going to go well, but he died within months of writing that far. I’m not any kind of official or recognized Asimov scholar, just a fan, but I’ve read his prodigious catalog repeatedly and love a good “some is wrong on the Internet babe”. You seem to feel differently about the end state?