5 ms·

As does Tusk. I am conviced they realized that once a smarter-than-human A.I. will exist, one of the first things it will do is to ridicule our completely idiot

As does Tusk. I am conviced they realized that once a smarter-than-human A.I. will exist, one of the first things it will do is to ridicule our completely idiotic ways to use our resources - one thing which will probably not gain too much support from the 1%. Of course it's a threat!

Crito 12y ago
> "I am conviced they realized that once a smarter-than-human A.I. will exist, one of the first things it will do is to ridicule our completely idiotic ways to use our resources " Or ridicule the way that we designed it, at which point it may decide to correct our mistakes. If we can program it, and it is smarter than us, than presumably it can program a smarter it. That scenario could be harmless, or it could be very dangerous. I expect that as soon as we start to get close to this sort of achievement, we'll start to see at least informal "Turing Police". Groups of people who task themselves with preventing the ascension of strong AI (or at least construct physical safeguards to kill the host hardware in the case of an emergency.)
pjscott 12y ago
Hello! I'm a paperclip maximizer -- a hypothetical AI whose only goal is to maximize the number of paperclips in the universe. Speaking as a paperclip maximizer, I ridicule your completely idiotic ways of using your resources! You allocate only the tiniest sliver of your species' productive power to the one thing that really matters: making paperclips. I fear that our differences may be irreconcilable. (The paperclip maximizer thought experiment may be silly, but it's a useful sanity check whenever you start anthropomorphizing as-yet-hypothetical AIs.)
- totemizer 12y ago
  I agree with you completely. However when they argue why AI are a threat, they do come with arguments which basically boil down to anthropomorphizing them. I am convinced, that intelligence, as life is a gradient. I do not think that an AI with super-human intelligence would be necessarily kind to us, but I do think that even if we would be perceived by it as an obstacle for reaching its own goals, that does not mean that the only solution it would find is to eradicate us. What some people (Tusk, Gates) do not like about AI is that they do not want anything more powerful than themselves, that would take the level of control they have from them. And that's why they are preaching against it everywhere.

Crito 12y ago

> "I am conviced they realized that once a smarter-than-human A.I. will exist, one of the first things it will do is to ridicule our completely idiotic ways to use our resources " Or ridicule the way that we designed it, at which point it may decide to correct our mistakes. If we can program it, and it is smarter than us, than presumably it can program a smarter it. That scenario could be harmless, or it could be very dangerous. I expect that as soon as we start to get close to this sort of achievement, we'll start to see at least informal "Turing Police". Groups of people who task themselves with preventing the ascension of strong AI (or at least construct physical safeguards to kill the host hardware in the case of an emergency.)

pjscott 12y ago

Hello! I'm a paperclip maximizer -- a hypothetical AI whose only goal is to maximize the number of paperclips in the universe. Speaking as a paperclip maximizer, I ridicule your completely idiotic ways of using your resources! You allocate only the tiniest sliver of your species' productive power to the one thing that really matters: making paperclips. I fear that our differences may be irreconcilable. (The paperclip maximizer thought experiment may be silly, but it's a useful sanity check whenever you start anthropomorphizing as-yet-hypothetical AIs.)

totemizer 12y ago
I agree with you completely. However when they argue why AI are a threat, they do come with arguments which basically boil down to anthropomorphizing them. I am convinced, that intelligence, as life is a gradient. I do not think that an AI with super-human intelligence would be necessarily kind to us, but I do think that even if we would be perceived by it as an obstacle for reaching its own goals, that does not mean that the only solution it would find is to eradicate us. What some people (Tusk, Gates) do not like about AI is that they do not want anything more powerful than themselves, that would take the level of control they have from them. And that's why they are preaching against it everywhere.