4 ms·

I'm currrently re-reading Jurassic Park, and I can't help but wonder whether we are committing the same mistakes with AI as the scientists in the book... AI se

I'm currrently re-reading Jurassic Park, and I can't help but wonder whether we are committing the same mistakes with AI as the scientists in the book... AI seems to be the ultimate example of "shoot first, ask questions later". We have no idea how AI will effect society, the marginal benefits to people are near-zero (measred in terms of the difference before any adoption to widespread adoption, not incremental intermediate stages), and most of the effects will likely be disastrous (much more efficient propaganda, much more efficient drug-in-the-form-of-media production to distract us from the true ills of the world to prevent a true revolution for good, and a huge wealth concentration towards tech companies). This wanton development of AI seems exceptionally reckless...

nurettin 3y ago
You could say the same thing about computers, but you are comfortably sitting in front of one of them. Previously you were probably sitting in a public transportation vehicle. How do you personally distinguish between "this is an apocalyptic mistake" and "this is a step in the right direction" ?
- yard2010 3y ago
  Not cp but I would say it's the scale and timeframes
  - CharlieDigital 3y ago
    I came to post the same. Computers and the Internet evolved over decades before what we would recognize as modern computers. Their first use cases were mathematical, scientific, and business oriented (word processing, financial models, etc.). It took decades for mass adoption and wider use cases to evolve. Sure, there were many cracks that had to fixed along the way (malware, botnets, privacy, piracy, distribution channel for illicit materials, environmental cost, etc.), but none of those things manifest in a timeline remotely close to what we see with gen AI seemingly reaching widespread adoption in a short ~24 mo. time period. The advancement has been so fast, that the real-world guardrails haven't had any time to catch up before the next advancement completely changes the playing field. Prime example is that Will Smith spaghetti video to Sora within months. Now we have AI denying care[0] to patients and generating deepfake porn[1] of celebrities, coworkers, and even minors. What are the lines we should draw as a society? It moves so fast that even knowing what the right discussion context is can be a challenge because the endpoints have shifted by the time we even understand the problem enough to have a constructive conversation. The socioeconomic impacts in some industries where AI can replaces workers will be tremendously negative for real-world, flesh-and-blood human beings who may not be ready or in a position to adapt to those changes. There is some postulation that the Arab Spring arose out of the effects of climate change on crop failures[3]. How will such a sudden and massive shift in employment and household income combined with other macroeconomic factors like inflation and housing costs affect the stability of society and social unrest? Don't get me wrong: this is not an argument against AI because certainly, if AI can do those jobs better, faster, and more efficiently, then why not? But rather as a community and society, we also need to understand the wider consequences of wiping out employment of 90% of the people in a given field of industry and what that looks like for our friends, families, neighbors. [0] https://arstechnica.com/health/2023/11/ai-with-90-error-rate-forces-elderly-out-of-rehab-nursing-homes-suit-claims/ https://arstechnica.com/health/2023/11/ai-with-90-error-rate... [1] https://www.euronews.com/next/2024/03/04/deepfake-porn-videos-surging-in-greece https://www.euronews.com/next/2024/03/04/deepfake-porn-video... [3] https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1PH23A/ https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1PH23A/
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  > How do you personally distinguish between "this is an apocalyptic mistake" and "this is a step in the right direction" ? Good question. The first step is to analyze each technology individually, rather than usual analogies :)
  - eurekin 3y ago
    Exactly! And study how it's actually is, without resorting to works of fiction made specificallly to entertain and be dramatic
- shippintoboston 3y ago
  [dead]
npteljes 3y ago
Another kind of cautionary tale could be that someone could, but doesn't advance something, because of moral reasons, and then someone else goes ahead and does it anyways. One of such tales is Ányos Jedlik, who might have had a lead in the creation of the electric motor and the dynamo, but we'll never truly know, as he was not the kind of person to go ahead and patent and build a business. Nevertheless, both were invented timely, and became the foundation of a more modern age. I think that at the end of the day, the dinos will get resurrected. What you can decide is what part you want of it.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  > What you can decide is what part you want of it. Or, you can build a revolution to take it down...
  - optimalsolver 3y ago
    Or find a middle way. Call it the Butlerian Compromise.
  - mistermann 3y ago
    Have you any specific ideas? Would you mind sharing what sort of programming you have skills in?
  - npteljes 3y ago
    I don't think that can happen. A revolution, and a new thing's concept are not in the same realm. Especially true if the thing has military implications. You just don't put that genie back to the bottle. Whatever do you, and I mean literally what ever, the thing will come to life. If it's socially acceptable, then the science magazines will hype about it, if not, it will be done in a laboratory that's not even on maps.
    - vouaobrasil 3y ago
      We could take down the technological civilization, and institute methods more like the Amish...not saying it will happen like that but I mean that's certainly possible.
pmarreck 3y ago
> AI seems to be the ultimate example of "shoot first, ask questions later". We have no idea how AI will effect society You know, you say this, but we had massive changes after personal computers and the Internet and the iPhone became a thing, and no studies to my knowledge were produced before any of these things were introduced. All of the predicted effects were only positive, because only good actors were involved in creating them, but as we now know, a lot of downsides also resulted, mainly because of bad actors and perverse incentives and simple human psychology. The progress of the last 40 years seems to be a validation of "Be careful what you wish for" I used to bike 5 miles to a library in the 80's (as a teen) in order to learn anything. Now it's all on a device in my pocket that I might have killed for were it available then. But of course, it's not just the phone, it's the ubiquitous cell network, the (wired) Internet, display/memory/cpu tech and everything else that all makes it possible. Can I spend "too much time" on my phone? Sure, but I'm also hyper-aware of that tendency now. I've learned to cope with the downsides, while gaining the advantages. I tend to believe that tech becomes available when we're ready for it, and that the positives always outweigh the negatives. (I'm still on the fence here regarding arms.)
- cnunciato 3y ago
  The obvious difference, though, is that you knowingly use all of these tools; you get to choose whether and how you use them. AI, like the weapons you point out, can invade your life without you knowing it even exists.
  - visarga 3y ago
    It's actually the other way around with AI. If you want to do web-search, you got to disclose your keywords to a search engine. If you want to post on social networks, you are in plain sight. If you use a mobile phone, you broadcast your location. But if you use your local models, it's more like running a linux box, it is private, customizable and unfiltered. LLMs will reverse the centralization trend we have seen with search and social. They can create a "safe space", "a room of one's own" where we can be creative and unrestricted. LLMs promise the privacy internet never gave us, anyone, remember how we felt private online 20 years ago? You can't download a Google or FB but you can download a Mistral and even run it on a normal laptop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Room_of_One%27s_Own https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Room_of_One%27s_Own
patwolf 3y ago
Unfortunately another theme of Michael Crichton books is that because of human hubris and corporate greed, the disaster is inevitable. Regulation and scientific ethics don't matter because humans find a way. Although, maybe that's because it wouldn't make for a very interesting book if government regulation successfully prevented Hammond from experimenting with DNA.
- smallmancontrov 3y ago
  The vibe I got from the book was not one of inevitability, more "if Hammond had actually spared no expense on any single one of these dominos, the lot of them would not have fallen together." Admittedly it's been a while, but I specifically remember being miffed at the whole "chaos theory dictates that dinosaurs will find a way to escape every zoo" thing, which turned a morality story about cutting corners into a mash of nonsense. Chaos dictates no such thing, of course, but the nature of entertainment dictates that if the dinos don't get out then you and I won't pay to see the movie, so yeah, at the end of the day we really ought to be careful about what inferences we draw from entertainment where the conclusion is fixed.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  > Unfortunately another theme of Michael Crichton books is that because of human hubris and corporate greed, the disaster is inevitable. Regulation and scientific ethics don't matter because humans find a way. This is exactly what has happened with humanity.
jsdeveloper 3y ago
The later we postpone the greater will be disaster. Suppose we had this AI at the dawn of internet, we would have google using this tech to search internet back then. We would have saved countless hours of search to fix a bug. AI is having an Einstein in our pocket. Any one who had to develop/research on any topic, he has an Einstein level assistance ready to help you out. We are just at the dawn of the sci-fi era we always have imagined for. And AI will be our companion in this fast changing world: "Jarvis explain me how that thing works" , and you get somewhat of an idea about any new or complex subject, which otherwise would have taken days to comprehend.

nurettin 3y ago

You could say the same thing about computers, but you are comfortably sitting in front of one of them. Previously you were probably sitting in a public transportation vehicle. How do you personally distinguish between "this is an apocalyptic mistake" and "this is a step in the right direction" ?

yard2010 3y ago
Not cp but I would say it's the scale and timeframes
- CharlieDigital 3y ago
  I came to post the same. Computers and the Internet evolved over decades before what we would recognize as modern computers. Their first use cases were mathematical, scientific, and business oriented (word processing, financial models, etc.). It took decades for mass adoption and wider use cases to evolve. Sure, there were many cracks that had to fixed along the way (malware, botnets, privacy, piracy, distribution channel for illicit materials, environmental cost, etc.), but none of those things manifest in a timeline remotely close to what we see with gen AI seemingly reaching widespread adoption in a short ~24 mo. time period. The advancement has been so fast, that the real-world guardrails haven't had any time to catch up before the next advancement completely changes the playing field. Prime example is that Will Smith spaghetti video to Sora within months. Now we have AI denying care[0] to patients and generating deepfake porn[1] of celebrities, coworkers, and even minors. What are the lines we should draw as a society? It moves so fast that even knowing what the right discussion context is can be a challenge because the endpoints have shifted by the time we even understand the problem enough to have a constructive conversation. The socioeconomic impacts in some industries where AI can replaces workers will be tremendously negative for real-world, flesh-and-blood human beings who may not be ready or in a position to adapt to those changes. There is some postulation that the Arab Spring arose out of the effects of climate change on crop failures[3]. How will such a sudden and massive shift in employment and household income combined with other macroeconomic factors like inflation and housing costs affect the stability of society and social unrest? Don't get me wrong: this is not an argument against AI because certainly, if AI can do those jobs better, faster, and more efficiently, then why not? But rather as a community and society, we also need to understand the wider consequences of wiping out employment of 90% of the people in a given field of industry and what that looks like for our friends, families, neighbors. [0] https://arstechnica.com/health/2023/11/ai-with-90-error-rate-forces-elderly-out-of-rehab-nursing-homes-suit-claims/ https://arstechnica.com/health/2023/11/ai-with-90-error-rate... [1] https://www.euronews.com/next/2024/03/04/deepfake-porn-videos-surging-in-greece https://www.euronews.com/next/2024/03/04/deepfake-porn-video... [3] https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1PH23A/ https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1PH23A/
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
vouaobrasil 3y ago
> How do you personally distinguish between "this is an apocalyptic mistake" and "this is a step in the right direction" ? Good question. The first step is to analyze each technology individually, rather than usual analogies :)
- eurekin 3y ago
  Exactly! And study how it's actually is, without resorting to works of fiction made specificallly to entertain and be dramatic
shippintoboston 3y ago
[dead]

npteljes 3y ago

Another kind of cautionary tale could be that someone could, but doesn't advance something, because of moral reasons, and then someone else goes ahead and does it anyways. One of such tales is Ányos Jedlik, who might have had a lead in the creation of the electric motor and the dynamo, but we'll never truly know, as he was not the kind of person to go ahead and patent and build a business. Nevertheless, both were invented timely, and became the foundation of a more modern age. I think that at the end of the day, the dinos will get resurrected. What you can decide is what part you want of it.

vouaobrasil 3y ago
> What you can decide is what part you want of it. Or, you can build a revolution to take it down...
- optimalsolver 3y ago
  Or find a middle way. Call it the Butlerian Compromise.
- mistermann 3y ago
  Have you any specific ideas? Would you mind sharing what sort of programming you have skills in?
- npteljes 3y ago
  I don't think that can happen. A revolution, and a new thing's concept are not in the same realm. Especially true if the thing has military implications. You just don't put that genie back to the bottle. Whatever do you, and I mean literally what ever, the thing will come to life. If it's socially acceptable, then the science magazines will hype about it, if not, it will be done in a laboratory that's not even on maps.
  - vouaobrasil 3y ago
    We could take down the technological civilization, and institute methods more like the Amish...not saying it will happen like that but I mean that's certainly possible.

pmarreck 3y ago

> AI seems to be the ultimate example of "shoot first, ask questions later". We have no idea how AI will effect society You know, you say this, but we had massive changes after personal computers and the Internet and the iPhone became a thing, and no studies to my knowledge were produced before any of these things were introduced. All of the predicted effects were only positive, because only good actors were involved in creating them, but as we now know, a lot of downsides also resulted, mainly because of bad actors and perverse incentives and simple human psychology. The progress of the last 40 years seems to be a validation of "Be careful what you wish for" I used to bike 5 miles to a library in the 80's (as a teen) in order to learn anything. Now it's all on a device in my pocket that I might have killed for were it available then. But of course, it's not just the phone, it's the ubiquitous cell network, the (wired) Internet, display/memory/cpu tech and everything else that all makes it possible. Can I spend "too much time" on my phone? Sure, but I'm also hyper-aware of that tendency now. I've learned to cope with the downsides, while gaining the advantages. I tend to believe that tech becomes available when we're ready for it, and that the positives always outweigh the negatives. (I'm still on the fence here regarding arms.)

cnunciato 3y ago
The obvious difference, though, is that you knowingly use all of these tools; you get to choose whether and how you use them. AI, like the weapons you point out, can invade your life without you knowing it even exists.
- visarga 3y ago
  It's actually the other way around with AI. If you want to do web-search, you got to disclose your keywords to a search engine. If you want to post on social networks, you are in plain sight. If you use a mobile phone, you broadcast your location. But if you use your local models, it's more like running a linux box, it is private, customizable and unfiltered. LLMs will reverse the centralization trend we have seen with search and social. They can create a "safe space", "a room of one's own" where we can be creative and unrestricted. LLMs promise the privacy internet never gave us, anyone, remember how we felt private online 20 years ago? You can't download a Google or FB but you can download a Mistral and even run it on a normal laptop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Room_of_One%27s_Own https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Room_of_One%27s_Own

patwolf 3y ago

Unfortunately another theme of Michael Crichton books is that because of human hubris and corporate greed, the disaster is inevitable. Regulation and scientific ethics don't matter because humans find a way. Although, maybe that's because it wouldn't make for a very interesting book if government regulation successfully prevented Hammond from experimenting with DNA.

smallmancontrov 3y ago
The vibe I got from the book was not one of inevitability, more "if Hammond had actually spared no expense on any single one of these dominos, the lot of them would not have fallen together." Admittedly it's been a while, but I specifically remember being miffed at the whole "chaos theory dictates that dinosaurs will find a way to escape every zoo" thing, which turned a morality story about cutting corners into a mash of nonsense. Chaos dictates no such thing, of course, but the nature of entertainment dictates that if the dinos don't get out then you and I won't pay to see the movie, so yeah, at the end of the day we really ought to be careful about what inferences we draw from entertainment where the conclusion is fixed.
vouaobrasil 3y ago
> Unfortunately another theme of Michael Crichton books is that because of human hubris and corporate greed, the disaster is inevitable. Regulation and scientific ethics don't matter because humans find a way. This is exactly what has happened with humanity.

jsdeveloper 3y ago

The later we postpone the greater will be disaster. Suppose we had this AI at the dawn of internet, we would have google using this tech to search internet back then. We would have saved countless hours of search to fix a bug. AI is having an Einstein in our pocket. Any one who had to develop/research on any topic, he has an Einstein level assistance ready to help you out. We are just at the dawn of the sci-fi era we always have imagined for. And AI will be our companion in this fast changing world: "Jarvis explain me how that thing works" , and you get somewhat of an idea about any new or complex subject, which otherwise would have taken days to comprehend.