4 ms·

Elon Musk: AI could be more dangerous than nukes

29 points by Libertatea 12y ago

tambourmajor 12y ago
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7931674 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7931674 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7689579 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7689579
id 12y ago
Reminds me of Roko's basilisk: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko's_basilisk http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko's_basilisk
- ErikBjare 12y ago
  It's a bit annoying that you can't even talk about this stuff without the basilisk interfering. Maybe we're dooming ourselves by laughing at the basilisk incident instead of taking the potentially larger issue seriously.
  - marktangotango 12y ago
    Indeed, it's kind of a round about metaphor for John the Baptists 'repent ye for the kingdom of heaven is at hand'. Which also concisely demonstrates why many don't give the the singularity or related notions (even the possibility of strong ai) credence. It's a little to religious ie unknowable.
gajomi 12y ago
This article adds to substance to Elon's cryptic tweet in favor of a cryptic reference to the Tron mythology. It seems to me though that the premise of strong AI warrants a degree of caution by its very definition. It would apparently be capable of all the things we are. But more likely it will be capable of all the things that we can program it to be capable of. the consequence of these actions remains underexamined, in my opinion.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
zoba 12y ago
What a terrible ending to the article. What Musk is warning against is a system that is capable of accomplishing it's own goals, and if those goals conflict with our own goals then there will be trouble - especially if the AI is clever enough. Whether or not we are living in a simulation is irrelevant - we are still agents with goals. Maybe the author was trying to be silly, but, if that's the case I can see why he writes for CNet at not Comedy Central.
- _up 12y ago
  I think even before AI becomes intelligent enough to potentially destroy us. They will be intelligent enough to get used as smart weapons that are controlled by only a handfull of poeple that seek to controll the world. For Atomic bombs you still need a lot of people to keep them working and effective. AI Robots on the other hand could work, repair and advance themself.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

29 points by Libertatea 12y ago

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7931674 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7931674 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7689579 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7689579

id 12y ago

Reminds me of Roko's basilisk: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko's_basilisk http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko's_basilisk

ErikBjare 12y ago
It's a bit annoying that you can't even talk about this stuff without the basilisk interfering. Maybe we're dooming ourselves by laughing at the basilisk incident instead of taking the potentially larger issue seriously.
- marktangotango 12y ago
  Indeed, it's kind of a round about metaphor for John the Baptists 'repent ye for the kingdom of heaven is at hand'. Which also concisely demonstrates why many don't give the the singularity or related notions (even the possibility of strong ai) credence. It's a little to religious ie unknowable.

gajomi 12y ago

This article adds to substance to Elon's cryptic tweet in favor of a cryptic reference to the Tron mythology. It seems to me though that the premise of strong AI warrants a degree of caution by its very definition. It would apparently be capable of all the things we are. But more likely it will be capable of all the things that we can program it to be capable of. the consequence of these actions remains underexamined, in my opinion.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

zoba 12y ago

What a terrible ending to the article. What Musk is warning against is a system that is capable of accomplishing it's own goals, and if those goals conflict with our own goals then there will be trouble - especially if the AI is clever enough. Whether or not we are living in a simulation is irrelevant - we are still agents with goals. Maybe the author was trying to be silly, but, if that's the case I can see why he writes for CNet at not Comedy Central.

_up 12y ago
I think even before AI becomes intelligent enough to potentially destroy us. They will be intelligent enough to get used as smart weapons that are controlled by only a handfull of poeple that seek to controll the world. For Atomic bombs you still need a lot of people to keep them working and effective. AI Robots on the other hand could work, repair and advance themself.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]