3 ms·

So that we can record our demise in high definition? Technology is amazing, and we have our civilization to be thankful for. But there are definitely technologi

by ehnto 3y ago

So that we can record our demise in high definition? Technology is amazing, and we have our civilization to be thankful for. But there are definitely technologies that in retrospect, if we had dodged them on the tech tree, we would be better off. Life would have continued just fine without many technologies, and I think AGI is one of them. We do not need AGI to survive and grow, and therefore any risk it imposes should be treated from that lens. If the choice is civil collapse, or no AGI, we should pick no AGI. I don't think we would though.

BriggyDwiggs42 3y ago
I think this perspective ignores that the only way to semi permanently improve the lives of future humans is technology, and that quality of life is of similar importance to survival, especially at its extremes. AGI, if we achieve it, could genuinely make human lives much better.
- pfisch 3y ago
  Technology could also make life worse. It has caused the rise of the middle class and democracy, but now it seems like technology is moving us back towards feudalism or something like it. It feels like democracy is not going to survive social media. I'm not sure if that is true yet, but it does seem that way.
- jimbokun 3y ago
  “Could” is carrying a lot of weight there. What is p(much better) vs p(much worse)?
  - andsoitis 3y ago
    > What is p(much better) vs p(much worse)? there are many more ways to be dead than being alive, yet here we are. Optimism > pessimism.
- ehnto 3y ago
  Certainly, but it could also be a net negative. We can however already identify ways in which it can benefit and harm our societies in the short term, so we should at least be considering mitigations of the negative aspects.
andsoitis 3y ago
> there are definitely technologies that in retrospect, if we had dodged them on the tech tree, we would be better off. yes, and there is an (uncountable?) number of technologies that are even worse and that we have not encountered and never will. it is in all likelihood not possible to ask the universe for only the knowledge that will be beneficial.
kouru225 3y ago
Disagree. We’re already on the verge of collapse. We definitely need AGI.
- ehnto 3y ago
  From your perspective, what does AGI do to solve our current set of predicaments?
  - kouru225 3y ago
    It solves our labor issue by upending millennia of forced labor practices. It solves our issue with knowledge and data by allowing us to automatically find patterns within massive amounts of complicated datasets. These are honestly the underlying causes of so much evil. Moreover, it provides a new consensus mechanism. Using the machine as a method of consensus allows humans to have a third party mediate disagreements.
    - ehnto 3y ago
      I see your point, but perhaps I just don't see the path our society takes to make it a positive thing. Your last point is the one I worry about most, since it is very likely these technologies will be controlled by large entities with their own interests and biases. There is also not a "correct" answer to many questions, and differences of perspective mean some parties can simply never agree. We already have truth at our fingertips yet it does not help. To your earlier points, I think unwinding labour from our society will be an incredibly difficult thing to do, though I agree is the root of much evil and would love to see a society that does not rely on labour participation to survive.
      - kouru225 3y ago
        Boss, you’re too worried about the short term and not worried enough about the long term. Our whole conception of reality will change in response to AI. Some people may be able to “control” AI and force them to make decisions that benefit their own companies, but that won’t last very long at all. Already, the AI companies are struggling to keep the AI from “hallucinating” and coming up with answers that don’t conform to their own biases. What’s most dangerous for our society right now isn’t change its stagnation.

by ehnto 3y ago

BriggyDwiggs42 3y ago

I think this perspective ignores that the only way to semi permanently improve the lives of future humans is technology, and that quality of life is of similar importance to survival, especially at its extremes. AGI, if we achieve it, could genuinely make human lives much better.

pfisch 3y ago
Technology could also make life worse. It has caused the rise of the middle class and democracy, but now it seems like technology is moving us back towards feudalism or something like it. It feels like democracy is not going to survive social media. I'm not sure if that is true yet, but it does seem that way.
jimbokun 3y ago
“Could” is carrying a lot of weight there. What is p(much better) vs p(much worse)?
- andsoitis 3y ago
  > What is p(much better) vs p(much worse)? there are many more ways to be dead than being alive, yet here we are. Optimism > pessimism.
ehnto 3y ago
Certainly, but it could also be a net negative. We can however already identify ways in which it can benefit and harm our societies in the short term, so we should at least be considering mitigations of the negative aspects.

andsoitis 3y ago

> there are definitely technologies that in retrospect, if we had dodged them on the tech tree, we would be better off. yes, and there is an (uncountable?) number of technologies that are even worse and that we have not encountered and never will. it is in all likelihood not possible to ask the universe for only the knowledge that will be beneficial.

kouru225 3y ago

Disagree. We’re already on the verge of collapse. We definitely need AGI.

ehnto 3y ago
From your perspective, what does AGI do to solve our current set of predicaments?
- kouru225 3y ago
  It solves our labor issue by upending millennia of forced labor practices. It solves our issue with knowledge and data by allowing us to automatically find patterns within massive amounts of complicated datasets. These are honestly the underlying causes of so much evil. Moreover, it provides a new consensus mechanism. Using the machine as a method of consensus allows humans to have a third party mediate disagreements.
  - ehnto 3y ago
    I see your point, but perhaps I just don't see the path our society takes to make it a positive thing. Your last point is the one I worry about most, since it is very likely these technologies will be controlled by large entities with their own interests and biases. There is also not a "correct" answer to many questions, and differences of perspective mean some parties can simply never agree. We already have truth at our fingertips yet it does not help. To your earlier points, I think unwinding labour from our society will be an incredibly difficult thing to do, though I agree is the root of much evil and would love to see a society that does not rely on labour participation to survive.
    - kouru225 3y ago
      Boss, you’re too worried about the short term and not worried enough about the long term. Our whole conception of reality will change in response to AI. Some people may be able to “control” AI and force them to make decisions that benefit their own companies, but that won’t last very long at all. Already, the AI companies are struggling to keep the AI from “hallucinating” and coming up with answers that don’t conform to their own biases. What’s most dangerous for our society right now isn’t change its stagnation.