45 ms·
> * If "AI" is actually intelligent, then it's no worse a threat than any living being known to man. That's not true, because you don't address the degree of i
by edanm 2y ago
> * If "AI" is actually intelligent, then it's no worse a threat than any living being known to man.
That's not true, because you don't address the degree of intelligence or the
scale that computers can achieve.
Even if all we were able to do is to create human-intelligence-equivalent AIs, but we were able to create, say, a billion on command, I'd say we have a major threat.
- d1sxeyes 2y agoOne point to recall on this as well is that if we do develop an intelligent AI, it may have taken us millions of years, but we did it. An intelligent AI would potentially be able to iterate and self develop much faster than we have been able to. It probably won’t take long to go from ‘human equivalent’ to being beyond that.
- edanm 2y agoThat's true, but I long ago got convinced that this particular worry isn't the most important one (the recursive-self-improvement one). I'm fairly sure that Yudkowsky and others are also pushing that less, because there is a reasonable chance that it's just not a necessary part of the argument; even without self-improving, it's possible that just something like GPT-8 or something is harmful enough on its own that there are significant risks.