4 ms·
To be honest, I see summoning the threat of AGI to pose an existential threat to be on the level with lizard people on the moon. Great for sci-fi, bad distracti
by raxxorraxor 3y ago
To be honest, I see summoning the threat of AGI to pose an existential threat to be on the level with lizard people on the moon. Great for sci-fi, bad distraction for policy making and addressing real problems.
The real war, if there is one, is about owning data and collecting data. And surprisingly many people fall for distractions while their LLM fails at basic math. Because it is a language model of course...
- the8472 3y agoFreely flying through the sky on wings was scifi before the wright brothers. Something sounding like scifi is not a sound argument that it won't happen. And unlike lizard people we do have exponential curves to point at. Something stronger than a vibes-based argument would be good.
- dvdkon 3y agoI consider the burden of proof to fall on those proclaiming AGI to be an existential threat, and so far I have not seen any convincing arguments. Maybe at some point in the future we will have many anthropomorphic robots and an AGI could hack them all and orchestrate a robot uprising, but at that point the robots would be the actual problem. Similarly, if an AGI could blow up nuclear power plants, so could well-funded human attackers; we need to secure the plants, not the AGI.
- the8472 3y agoYou say you have not seen any arguments that convince you. Is that just not having seen many arguments or having seen a lot of arguments where each chain contained some fatal flaw? Or something else?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cjbprime 3y agoIt doesn't sound like you gave serious thought to the arguments. The AGI doesn't need to hack robots. It has superhuman persuasion, by definition; it can "hack" (enough of) the humans to achieve its goals.
- CamperBob2 3y agoThen it's just a matter of evolution in action. And while it doesn't take a God to start evolution, it would take a God to stop it.
- hollerith 3y agoYou might be OK with suddenly dying along with all your friends and family, but I am not even if it is "evolution in action".
- CamperBob2 3y agoHistorically governments haven't needed computers or AI to do that. They've always managed just fine. Punched cards helped, though, I guess...
- FeepingCreature 3y agogestures at the human population graph wordlessly
- CamperBob2 3y agoAgent Smith smiles mirthlessly
- stale2002 3y agoAI mind control abilities are also on the level of an extraordinary claim, that requires extraordinary evidence. It's on the level of "we better regulate wooden sticks so Voldemort doesn't use the imperious curse on us!". That's how I treat such claims. I treat them the same as someone literally talking about magic from Harry potter. There isn't nothing that would make me believe that. But it requires actual evidence and not thought experiments.
- pixl97 3y ago> I see summoning the threat of AGI to pose an existential threat to be on the level with lizard people on the moon. I mean to every other lifeform on the plant YOU are the AGI existential threat. You, and I mean homosapiens by that, have taken over the planet and have either enslaved and are breeding any other animals for food, or are driving them to extinction. In this light bringing another potential apex predator on to the scene seems rash. >fall for distractions while their LLM fails at basic math Correct, if we already had AGI/ASI this discussion would be moot because we'd already be in a world of trouble. The entire point is to slow stuff down before we have a major "oopsie whoopsie we can't take that back" issue with advanced AI, and the best time to set the rules is now.