4 ms·

I don't think this analogy is wholly applicable, simply given the scale and potential blast radius of certain classes of models. A more apt analogy would be nu

by nrawe 3y ago

I don't think this analogy is wholly applicable, simply given the scale and potential blast radius of certain classes of models. A more apt analogy would be nuclear technology. There are the Atomic Gardeners on the one hand, who believe in only the good and see the promise of the technology and peoples intent, and then there is the bitter struggle for power and threat which hinges on it. In most cases, ML models have the capability to revolutionise or at least augment/optimise problems in predictable ways. In extreme cases, deepfake technology and the like can erode at the tenuous levels of trust which hold societies together. We have seen what happens when disinformation, mistrust, and even basic levels of technology meet: look at students being lynched in India, Pakistan, and elsewhere due to WhatsApp group messages claiming blasphemy; or the practice of SWOTing; or the insinuation of CSE gangs leading to a pizza parlour in the US being stormed by someone with a machine gun. The stakes here are a lot larger than pure technologists, todays Atomic Gardeners, may perceive. In that context, legislation is trying to provide a counterweight to the pace of change to allow for some – any – breathing room, and particularly to prevent an increasingly hostile cast of nation states from weaponising that technology, even in small ways. For example, OSINT of North Koreas operations show that the basic parts needed for making baby powder are also capable of being used for weapons development.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
fnordlord 3y ago
I think all the issues that you've listed are serious. They're the things that keep me up at night. But I don't think the content is really problematic (except maybe deep fakes), it's the untraceable nature of their sources. To me, it's anonymity that gives them their power. If we knew that the content was posted by a specific REAL person/company/government, we could judge it's authenticity and hold them liable if it's criminal in some way. Not saying there isn't a place for anonymity on the internet but to me, that's the problem that needs to be solved more so than AI.
mlsu 3y ago
imho, and you can call me an atomic gardener if you wish, nuclear tech is a bad example. If we had actually gone "all in" on nuclear to produce electricity, our and the world's clean energy footprint might result in warming of entire degC's less than it's currently projected to be. Climate change is a global problem -- what stakes could possibly be higher than ecological collapse? I actually cannot think of any example where successfully withholding technology has helped people thrive and prosper. People using this tech to sow distrust is outweighed, so obviously and so massively, by the benefit of having an intelligent machine companion under their complete control. Every "weapons technology" in human history has been used for good. Every single one.

by nrawe 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

fnordlord 3y ago

I think all the issues that you've listed are serious. They're the things that keep me up at night. But I don't think the content is really problematic (except maybe deep fakes), it's the untraceable nature of their sources. To me, it's anonymity that gives them their power. If we knew that the content was posted by a specific REAL person/company/government, we could judge it's authenticity and hold them liable if it's criminal in some way. Not saying there isn't a place for anonymity on the internet but to me, that's the problem that needs to be solved more so than AI.

mlsu 3y ago

imho, and you can call me an atomic gardener if you wish, nuclear tech is a bad example. If we had actually gone "all in" on nuclear to produce electricity, our and the world's clean energy footprint might result in warming of entire degC's less than it's currently projected to be. Climate change is a global problem -- what stakes could possibly be higher than ecological collapse? I actually cannot think of any example where successfully withholding technology has helped people thrive and prosper. People using this tech to sow distrust is outweighed, so obviously and so massively, by the benefit of having an intelligent machine companion under their complete control. Every "weapons technology" in human history has been used for good. Every single one.