4 ms·

We need to be careful of wishful thinking. People are going to want to assume the existence of some sort of "deus ex machina" which is going to make everything

We need to be careful of wishful thinking. People are going to want to assume the existence of some sort of "deus ex machina" which is going to make everything fine. I prefer to turn the logic around. If there's any decently high chance that things could go off the rails, we should be shutting AI development down: https://pauseai.info/ https://pauseai.info/

strgrd 1mo ago
It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the pausing of AI.
- ijidak 1mo ago
  Yeah. Humans will shut down AI research around the same time they dismantle their nuclear weapons and agree on the causes of climate change.
  - 1attice 1mo ago
    Agreement will be much easier with only a handful of survivors. Good news
- 0xDEAFBEAD 1mo ago
  People were feeling doomtastic about nuclear weapons during the Cold War as well. Listen to the words of this song written in 1969: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2JcxHX-8Xc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2JcxHX-8Xc When every man is torn apart With nightmares and with dreams Will no one lay the laurel wreath When silence drowns the screams Confusion will be my epitaph As I crawl a cracked and broken path If we make it, we can all sit back and laugh But I fear tomorrow I'll be crying Ultimately, we have made it, through arms control agreements, working to limit the spread of nuclear weapons, and so forth. We can do the same for AI. You don't have help. But perhaps you could at least avoid discouraging people unnecessarily? *EDIT*: There are about 5 replies to this comment making roughly the same point. I'm not sure which to reply to, so I'll just reply here. I'm not claiming that our execution as a species around nuclear weapons has been flawless. I'm not claiming that we are out of the woods with regard to nukes. I'm just trying to push back against defeatism and fatalism. Some felt a sense of inevitable doom during the Cold War. It's been decades now, and nuclear doom still isn't here! Our situation is dire, but not hopeless.
  - jonahx 1mo ago
    > Ultimately, we have made it Spinning the present situation or the history of nuclear arms as a high-five, "go team human!" success story is... quite the take (Vasili Arkhipov, Cuban missile crisis generally, the current doomsday clock being "the closest the Clock has ever been to midnight in its history"). > You don't have help. But perhaps you could at least avoid discouraging people unnecessarily? More germanely, you don't have to worry yourself, but at least avoid discouraging people with legitimate worries who want to take precautions. Even the present situation with nuclear weapons, precarious as it is, would likely be more precarious were it not for the political pressure of the people worrying in the 1950s and 1960s and up to today.
    - 0xDEAFBEAD 1mo ago
      >Spinning the present situation or the history of nuclear arms as a high-five, "go team human!" success story is... quite the take (Vasili Arkhipov, Cuban missile crisis generally, the current doomsday clock being "the closest the Clock has ever been to midnight in its history"). I edited a response to this in my grandparent comment. >More germanely, you don't have to worry yourself, but at least avoid discouraging people with legitimate worries who want to take precautions. Even the present situation with nuclear weapons, precarious as it is, would likely be more precarious were it not for the political pressure of the people worrying in the 1950s and 1960s and up to today. Sorry, I may have mis-communicated. I want people to take precautions! That's why I linked to PauseAI: https://pauseai.info/ https://pauseai.info/ I'm trying to push back against defeatism.
      - jonahx 1mo ago
        Thanks for clarifying.
  - astrobe_ 1mo ago
    Except we did had a bunch of close calls [1]. Also, we've been warned about climate change for at least 30 years and were unable to avoid it. So OP's remark is entirely deserved. Until proven otherwise, we are not part of a movie where the hero saves the day at the end. I thought 9/11 made it pretty clear to everyone? [1] https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2020-03-16/false-warnings-soviet-missile-attacks-during-1979-80-led-alert-actions-us-strategic-forces https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2020-0...
- vouaobrasil 1mo ago
  I don't think the end of the world would even be a bad thing; a lot of people assume that it would be disastrous but I think it's much more likely that it the "end" would just be a fragmentation that would be pretty uncomfortable, but not to the point of being horrific. I actually think that people are more resilient and creative than they think and if they were faced by a global economic collapse so strong that big tech would go bankrupt, they would bounce back pretty quickly. It's just that we've seen so many movies about the end and have been conditioned to believe that we're helpless that we think otherwise.
  - 0xDEAFBEAD 1mo ago
    The end of the world would be pretty bad for low-income families. That alone is enough for me to oppose the end of the world. The end of the world would mean the genocide of remote uncontacted tribes. That alone is enough for me to oppose the end of the world. The end of the world would mean my grandma dies. That alone is enough for me to oppose the end of the world.
- michaelbarton 1mo ago
  Is this a reference to capitalist realism? If so have we evolved a new trend?
- stratos123 29d ago
  It is indeed easier to imagine, which doesn't mean it's a more desirable outcome.

strgrd 1mo ago

It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the pausing of AI.

ijidak 1mo ago
Yeah. Humans will shut down AI research around the same time they dismantle their nuclear weapons and agree on the causes of climate change.
- 1attice 1mo ago
  Agreement will be much easier with only a handful of survivors. Good news
0xDEAFBEAD 1mo ago
People were feeling doomtastic about nuclear weapons during the Cold War as well. Listen to the words of this song written in 1969: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2JcxHX-8Xc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2JcxHX-8Xc When every man is torn apart With nightmares and with dreams Will no one lay the laurel wreath When silence drowns the screams Confusion will be my epitaph As I crawl a cracked and broken path If we make it, we can all sit back and laugh But I fear tomorrow I'll be crying Ultimately, we have made it, through arms control agreements, working to limit the spread of nuclear weapons, and so forth. We can do the same for AI. You don't have help. But perhaps you could at least avoid discouraging people unnecessarily? *EDIT*: There are about 5 replies to this comment making roughly the same point. I'm not sure which to reply to, so I'll just reply here. I'm not claiming that our execution as a species around nuclear weapons has been flawless. I'm not claiming that we are out of the woods with regard to nukes. I'm just trying to push back against defeatism and fatalism. Some felt a sense of inevitable doom during the Cold War. It's been decades now, and nuclear doom still isn't here! Our situation is dire, but not hopeless.
- jonahx 1mo ago
  > Ultimately, we have made it Spinning the present situation or the history of nuclear arms as a high-five, "go team human!" success story is... quite the take (Vasili Arkhipov, Cuban missile crisis generally, the current doomsday clock being "the closest the Clock has ever been to midnight in its history"). > You don't have help. But perhaps you could at least avoid discouraging people unnecessarily? More germanely, you don't have to worry yourself, but at least avoid discouraging people with legitimate worries who want to take precautions. Even the present situation with nuclear weapons, precarious as it is, would likely be more precarious were it not for the political pressure of the people worrying in the 1950s and 1960s and up to today.
  - 0xDEAFBEAD 1mo ago
    >Spinning the present situation or the history of nuclear arms as a high-five, "go team human!" success story is... quite the take (Vasili Arkhipov, Cuban missile crisis generally, the current doomsday clock being "the closest the Clock has ever been to midnight in its history"). I edited a response to this in my grandparent comment. >More germanely, you don't have to worry yourself, but at least avoid discouraging people with legitimate worries who want to take precautions. Even the present situation with nuclear weapons, precarious as it is, would likely be more precarious were it not for the political pressure of the people worrying in the 1950s and 1960s and up to today. Sorry, I may have mis-communicated. I want people to take precautions! That's why I linked to PauseAI: https://pauseai.info/ https://pauseai.info/ I'm trying to push back against defeatism.
    - jonahx 1mo ago
      Thanks for clarifying.
- astrobe_ 1mo ago
  Except we did had a bunch of close calls [1]. Also, we've been warned about climate change for at least 30 years and were unable to avoid it. So OP's remark is entirely deserved. Until proven otherwise, we are not part of a movie where the hero saves the day at the end. I thought 9/11 made it pretty clear to everyone? [1] https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2020-03-16/false-warnings-soviet-missile-attacks-during-1979-80-led-alert-actions-us-strategic-forces https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2020-0...
vouaobrasil 1mo ago
I don't think the end of the world would even be a bad thing; a lot of people assume that it would be disastrous but I think it's much more likely that it the "end" would just be a fragmentation that would be pretty uncomfortable, but not to the point of being horrific. I actually think that people are more resilient and creative than they think and if they were faced by a global economic collapse so strong that big tech would go bankrupt, they would bounce back pretty quickly. It's just that we've seen so many movies about the end and have been conditioned to believe that we're helpless that we think otherwise.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 1mo ago
  The end of the world would be pretty bad for low-income families. That alone is enough for me to oppose the end of the world. The end of the world would mean the genocide of remote uncontacted tribes. That alone is enough for me to oppose the end of the world. The end of the world would mean my grandma dies. That alone is enough for me to oppose the end of the world.
michaelbarton 1mo ago
Is this a reference to capitalist realism? If so have we evolved a new trend?
stratos123 29d ago
It is indeed easier to imagine, which doesn't mean it's a more desirable outcome.