4 ms·
Agreed. As someone who works in AI (and knows its limitations) it's frustrating to see the layperson getting nervous about AI after watching Chappie and hearing
by mikejholly 12y ago
Agreed. As someone who works in AI (and knows its limitations) it's frustrating to see the layperson getting nervous about AI after watching Chappie and hearing some of these quotes from Gates and the like. Human level AI is way way way out.
- codezero 12y agoI think it's reasonable for the layperson to get a bit nervous. Even if it's 50 or 200 years, advanced, human-brain-like-or-better AI will happen. Imagine the public sentiment if mass media made people aware of the inevitability of the nuclear bomb 50 to 200 years in advance and people (not just the government) were actively working on developing it.
- NhanH 12y agoIn the analogy of nuclear bomb, it's more likely than not a public awareness of nuclear power would have prevented nuclear plant (the good thing), nuclear bomb (the bad thing) is extremely unlikely to not be developed anyway.
- codezero 12y agoMaybe, it's hard to know for sure, just like it's hard to know now :) I think that had nuclear physics been more obvious 50-200 years earlier, it may have lead to a lot more practical private-sector development. In the case of power generation, this is seriously beneficial. How will private-sector AI turn out? Will they boot up sentient AIs in Docker, then discard them? Is that OK? Who even knows?