3 ms·
I think the whole "AGI safety" debate is a red herring that has taken attention away from the negative externalities of AI as it exists today. Namely, (even mor
by AlexandrB 3y ago
I think the whole "AGI safety" debate is a red herring that has taken attention away from the negative externalities of AI as it exists today. Namely, (even more) data collection from users and questions of IP rights around models and their outputs.
- JoshTriplett 3y agoWe can do more than one thing at a time. (Or, more to the point, different people can do different things.) We can advocate against misuses of current capabilities, and advocate about the much larger threats of future capabilities.
- flappyeagle 3y agoWe really can’t. We are terrible at multitasking.
- williamcotton 3y agoIf you look around you’ll see that there are indeed very many people who are doing very different things from one another and without much centralized coordination.
- ethbr1 3y agoParent is likely referring to political/mass pressure behind initiatives. In which case the lack of a clear singular message, when confronted with a determined and amoral adversary, dissolves into confusion. Most classically, because the adversary plants PR behind "It's still an open debate among experts." See: cigarettes, climate change
- Onavo 3y agoThere's a big fucking difference between people who want to regulate AI because they might become a doomsday terminator paperclip factory (the register-model-with-government-if-they-are-too-big-crowd) and the folks who want to prevent AI being used to indirectly discriminate in hiring and immigration.
- rqtwteye 3y agoAlso the potential for massive job losses and even more wealth inequality. I feel a lot of the people who are philosophizing about AI safety are well-off people who are worried about losing their position of influence and power. They don't care about the average guy who will lose his job.