5 ms·

How do you know it's far away? If I have to side with you or Musk (extremely intelligent engineer with insider knowledge of advancements), I'm siding with Musk.

by butwhy 12y ago

pluma 12y ago
Intelligence does not protect against stupidity, sadly. I'm all for siding with Musk, but authority does not guarantee correctness.
- butwhy 12y ago
  If you want to make big claims like that, you better be able to back them up. So go ahead, cough up a few hyperlinks to some conclusive and concrete evidence and research that absolutely rules out the potential of humanity-harming AI in this context. Otherwise, you can quit your trolling.
  - pluma 12y ago
    How is the null hypothesis that AI is harmful?
aligajani 12y ago
Musk by no means is an authority on AI. It's just an opinion. He's being a futurist.
- butwhy 12y ago
  Indeed it is an opinion. An opinion of someone who recently invested millions in an AI company.
  - aligajani 12y ago
    This doesn't say much. "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." -- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943. Boy he was wrong.
xienze 12y ago
I know it's far away because I develop software for a living. In software development, you have to understand the problem space in order to create something that works (duh). Relatively speaking, we know absolutely nothing about how human intelligence works from an algorithmic point of view, therefore we can't model it in software. Sure, we can develop "AI" that is good at a very narrow range of tasks (e.g., playing chess), but that's a million miles away from developing a human brain modeled in software.
- butwhy 12y ago
  You could be right, you could be wrong. Do you work in AI? I suppose it's hard to tell how far the industry actually is, towards emulating portions of brain functionality.
- Voloskaya 12y ago
  70% of hacker news readers develop software for a living, that doesn't make us in any way competent to judge that. I would even argue that may make us less competent, because we use our day to day development routine as a reference for that, while in fact it's very highly probable that the first true AI will have nothing to do with the technologies and paradigm you use everyday. I highly doubt it will coded in Java and AngularJS. Moreover who told you a dangerous AI needed to be based on human brain? Even if that is true, and even if we are not able to do it today, it's quite realistic to assume that we will be able to at one point, not too far in time, in some decades. So why not start reflecting today on the threat AI could cause? Rather than waiting for it to be embedded everywhere in our everyday life, and then asking if maybe we should start regulating it. For a parallel look at the global warming issue, and how it's extremely difficult to make industries reduce their emissions now that they are responsible for a significant part of the GDP and are responsible for so much jobs. Same thing for ICE cars, we know they pollute, but we just can't stop using them like that.
  - xienze 12y ago
    > Moreover who told you a dangerous AI needed to be based on human brain? All these doomsday AI scenarios are predicated on a machine becoming "self aware", having independent thought, the ability to handle self-directed learning, etc. Sounds a lot like human intelligence.
cLeEOGPw 12y ago
Extremely intelligent people also make mistakes. There are plenty of examples of very smart people believing very wrong ideas.
ebbv 12y ago
There's not even a quote from Musk in this article and you're "siding with Musk" just because he's mentioned in it? That's pretty ridiculous. From what I've seen on Musk about this before, he's much more measured in his comments than Hawking is in this article. Maybe Hawking is being misrepresented. When I've seen Musk make comments about it he talks about it in the way that people talk about the sun eventually expanding and swallowing the earth. It's not something that's going to happen really soon. We're not even anywhere near an AI that can simulate the simplest living organisms let alone a truly intelligent AI. It's absurd to worry about a Skynet like scenario.

How do you know it's far away? If I have to side with you or Musk (extremely intelligent engineer with insider knowledge of advancements), I'm siding with Musk.

by butwhy 12y ago

How do you know it's far away? If I have to side with you or Musk (extremely intelligent engineer with insider knowledge of advancements), I'm siding with Musk.

pluma 12y ago

Intelligence does not protect against stupidity, sadly. I'm all for siding with Musk, but authority does not guarantee correctness.

butwhy 12y ago
If you want to make big claims like that, you better be able to back them up. So go ahead, cough up a few hyperlinks to some conclusive and concrete evidence and research that absolutely rules out the potential of humanity-harming AI in this context. Otherwise, you can quit your trolling.
- pluma 12y ago
  How is the null hypothesis that AI is harmful?

aligajani 12y ago

Musk by no means is an authority on AI. It's just an opinion. He's being a futurist.

butwhy 12y ago
Indeed it is an opinion. An opinion of someone who recently invested millions in an AI company.
- aligajani 12y ago
  This doesn't say much. "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." -- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943. Boy he was wrong.

xienze 12y ago

I know it's far away because I develop software for a living. In software development, you have to understand the problem space in order to create something that works (duh). Relatively speaking, we know absolutely nothing about how human intelligence works from an algorithmic point of view, therefore we can't model it in software. Sure, we can develop "AI" that is good at a very narrow range of tasks (e.g., playing chess), but that's a million miles away from developing a human brain modeled in software.

butwhy 12y ago
You could be right, you could be wrong. Do you work in AI? I suppose it's hard to tell how far the industry actually is, towards emulating portions of brain functionality.
Voloskaya 12y ago
70% of hacker news readers develop software for a living, that doesn't make us in any way competent to judge that. I would even argue that may make us less competent, because we use our day to day development routine as a reference for that, while in fact it's very highly probable that the first true AI will have nothing to do with the technologies and paradigm you use everyday. I highly doubt it will coded in Java and AngularJS. Moreover who told you a dangerous AI needed to be based on human brain? Even if that is true, and even if we are not able to do it today, it's quite realistic to assume that we will be able to at one point, not too far in time, in some decades. So why not start reflecting today on the threat AI could cause? Rather than waiting for it to be embedded everywhere in our everyday life, and then asking if maybe we should start regulating it. For a parallel look at the global warming issue, and how it's extremely difficult to make industries reduce their emissions now that they are responsible for a significant part of the GDP and are responsible for so much jobs. Same thing for ICE cars, we know they pollute, but we just can't stop using them like that.
- xienze 12y ago
  > Moreover who told you a dangerous AI needed to be based on human brain? All these doomsday AI scenarios are predicated on a machine becoming "self aware", having independent thought, the ability to handle self-directed learning, etc. Sounds a lot like human intelligence.

cLeEOGPw 12y ago

Extremely intelligent people also make mistakes. There are plenty of examples of very smart people believing very wrong ideas.

ebbv 12y ago

There's not even a quote from Musk in this article and you're "siding with Musk" just because he's mentioned in it? That's pretty ridiculous. From what I've seen on Musk about this before, he's much more measured in his comments than Hawking is in this article. Maybe Hawking is being misrepresented. When I've seen Musk make comments about it he talks about it in the way that people talk about the sun eventually expanding and swallowing the earth. It's not something that's going to happen really soon. We're not even anywhere near an AI that can simulate the simplest living organisms let alone a truly intelligent AI. It's absurd to worry about a Skynet like scenario.