4 ms·
The argument is pretty simple: people have been claiming the sky is falling for millennia and it still hasn't happened. It probably won't happen soon.
by ThrowawayTestr 3y ago
The argument is pretty simple: people have been claiming the sky is falling for millennia and it still hasn't happened. It probably won't happen soon.
- williamcotton 3y agoInstead of reiterating the contents of the article we are commenting on I will instead point readers to the article itself as it thoroughly dismantles your line of reasoning. I make no comment on the dangers of AI.
- f154hfds 3y agoHow does the author dismantle everything? He literally concludes with: > Conclusion: I Genuinely Don’t Know What These People Are Thinking Two things can be true at the same time (and are always true of 100's of aspects of modern life): 1. A devastating possibility is in theory possible, the likelihood of it happening is non-zero. 2. We can't live and make decisions catastrophizing given _we have absolutely no understanding_ about the real likelihood. Is the coffee example a good argument? Of course not! But do we know the likelihood of humanity's ability to create super intelligence AND that that intelligence will cause unimaginable suffering? Uh I don't think so?
- williamcotton 3y agoThe comment I am responding to is a worse version of the coffee argument.
- harimau777 3y agoThe article points out that the sky has fallen several times. The fall of Rome, WW2, the Great Depression, the black plague, etc.
- ThrowawayTestr 3y agoAnd yet civilization still exists.
- harimau777 3y agoThe article isn't saying that civilization won't exists. It's saying that there could be a disaster on the scale of previous disasters such as the Civil War or early industrialization. Notably, there have been numerous cases where a disaster wiped out a given society even if other societies still existed or replaced it.
- ImHereToVote 3y agoI think the person you are replying to isn't too concerned with millions or billions of casualties. I may be wrong though.
- ThrowawayTestr 3y agoI take issue with this notion that matrix multiplication will lead to billions of deaths.
- reducesuffering 3y agoI take issue with this notion that sky carbon will lead to millions of deaths. I take issue with this notion that microscopic chain reactions could lead to billions of deaths.
- ThrowawayTestr 3y agoThere's is hard evidence for both of these claims. There is no evidence that AI will magically learn how to control the world's factories and turn us all into paperclips.
- reducesuffering 2y ago