4 ms·
My cynical take is that the arrival of AGI would be legislated away, probably for decades. If it can do an engineer's job, but better, it can do the CEO's job b
by coderenegade 3y ago
My cynical take is that the arrival of AGI would be legislated away, probably for decades. If it can do an engineer's job, but better, it can do the CEO's job better as well. And the president's. When everyone's livelihoods are on the line, those with a lot to lose will wage endless war to keep from losing it. The process of getting everyone on side and validating that things are unquestionably better will take a generation. Even if we perfected AGI tomorrow, I suspect I would be an old man, or dead and buried, before it actually runs the show.
The other question is: what sort of economy would even remain? One where the same AGI runs everything and engages in adversarial games against itself?
- _nalply 3y agoAGI is difficult to forbid, compared to certain illegal media. Legal enforcement can look at media to decide if some enforcement is neccessary. The most difficult thing is probably gaining access to a laptop, for example. But what exactly is AGI? This is the first problem. Where to draw the border between harmless and dangerous AI? Careful legislation needs to give clear limits. Too little and real AGI doesn't get banned. Too much and useful AI like LLMs get banned. Unclear law is unenforceable and people start ignoring it. The second problem is detecting. Police can just look at media and they know. But they can't look at abstract data and immediately say, hm, looks suspicious. They need to look at software behavior, and this is a lot more work. This is like catching someone stealing red-handed. But what behavior exactly is illegal, even if they could watch AGI doing something? And finally, AGI is probably clever and might hide by playing dumb.