3 ms·
I guess the disagreement you have with doomers is the probablility you assign to us being able to create human level AI. For the record most "doomers" don't pul
by adroniser 3y ago
I guess the disagreement you have with doomers is the probablility you assign to us being able to create human level AI. For the record most "doomers" don't pull a pascal's wager here. Standard EA doctrine is that if we stagnate technologically at our current level for too long (read centuries) then we will inevitably be wiped out. So they want technological advance, they just want caution.
- timr 3y agoI don't know what "most" do, but I see that form of argument all the time -- particularly from the highest profile doomers. Personally, I think this line of argument is driven by the hype cycle more than reality. Use chatGPT or midjourney or whatever for a while, and it's pretty easy to see that we're dramatically overweighting theories of AGI risk, and dramatically underweighting stuff like "disemploying the bottom 80% of the intelligence bell curve" with technologies that automate away lots of formerly white-collar labor. If I had to put my money on an "existential risk" attributable to AI, it would be economic strife.
- adroniser 3y agoIt's worth saying we still haven't seen a single model trained post-hype cycle from openAI. GPT-4 was summer 2022 stuff.