4 ms·
Just to voice the opposing view for lurkers: no, the safety concerns about this new and unexpected technology are not unfounded, and dismissing them because cha
by bbor 2y ago
Just to voice the opposing view for lurkers: no, the safety concerns about this new and unexpected technology are not unfounded, and dismissing them because chatbots make mistakes is completely missing the point. The point is that experts have been thinking about AI for a long time, and have identified the theoretical limits that prevented us from reaching (‘real’ / ‘general’) AI. Those experts (other thank Chomsky, for now…) are now sounding the alarm — with the advent of intuitive algorithms, the Frame Problem dissolves and a ton of previously intractable problems become tractable.
The point isn’t that chatbots will take over the world through a browser window. The point is that someone’s going to connect 10,000 specialized GPT agents into a series of self-organizing hierarchical agencies, and then hook that up to their country’s justice system, propaganda & surveillance systems, and military systems. Not to mention replacing knowledge workers in mass and the well-discussed potential fallout therein.
We are living in the most exciting, important time since the world wars at the least, and I hope that choice of example drives home the seriousness. Short term, “Solidarity” and “basic human rights” need to enter all of our vocabularies, IMO…
- renegade-otter 2y agoWell, yes, but the problem is still the people, and these warnings are usually not clear, specific, or just confusing. Then there is also the media, which breathlessly "translates" what you just wrote into "artificial intelligence is about to go sentient and kill us all".