This elegantly captures something I think I've always observed, but been unable to articulate, in all of the superintelligence literature and the AGI / AI safety line of thinking: There is an implicit set of unarticulated underlying assumptions, and biases, that form the foundation from which the rest of the argument is "logically" progressed or extrapolated/ inferred.
Could you elaborate what you think those underlying assumptions are?
The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
61–70 of 114 posts
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#62This argument is not from technologists! The major proponents I'm aware of are Nick Bostrom, a philosopher, and Eliezer Yudkowski. Musk is simply repeating their argument, because he found it convincing. It strikes me as extremely dishonest to psychoanalyze an argument based on the celebrity who repeated it.
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#63Nicely done Buzzfeed. Billionaires like Bill Gates and Elon Musk assume that a superintelligent AI will stop at nothing to achieves its goals because that’s the attitude they adopted. Kind of reminds one of Ex Machina . If amoral profit maximizers design AI, it's very possibly gonna be an amoral profit maximizer. It still irrationally bothers me after 30 years of shitty MS products and Gates literally preventing tech…
Second, you can accuse him of preventing technological progress, but he was responsible more than probably any other person for bringing personal computing to the masses. I think he said his goal was a personal computer on every desktop and he pretty much achieved his goal.
Finally, the Gates foundation's work on malaria and maternal mortality has and will do more good for more people than many thousands of the "disrupt the world for good" startups ever will.
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#64Capitalism is danger for civilization? Writes who? A buzzfeed. A very, very leftist media site. How we end up in situation when huge portion (if not majority) of hacker community turned out to be die hard socialists ? (nowadays they call themselves social-democrats) I remember when I lived in Uzbekistan and I didn't have access to internet, I got floppy disk with saved copies of Eric Raymond articles. Once I've read…
No. Capitalism is good. However, runaway winner-take-all capitalism will destroy our planet and lead us back to feudalism. The great success of the United States has been its' ability to restrain unfettered capitalism with social responsibility, while not hampering the progress of the former. That contract has begun to break down, and it is causing the horrors we now see.
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#65Capitalism is danger for civilization? Writes who? A buzzfeed. A very, very leftist media site. How we end up in situation when huge portion (if not majority) of hacker community turned out to be die hard socialists ? (nowadays they call themselves social-democrats) I remember when I lived in Uzbekistan and I didn't have access to internet, I got floppy disk with saved copies of Eric Raymond articles. Once I've read…
You _cannot_ build a society on individualism. We have shared needs that only scale with our shared contribution. We also have _plenty_. We have the resources to ensure the health and well-being of every human being on the planet.
We need capitalism to innovate and respond with agility to market forces (when THERE'S ACTUALLY A FREE AND TRANSPARENT MARKET), but we need socialism to check their power, as a corporation is wont to become singular, which, as you've stated, a singular, centralized power is no good either.
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#66Why not both?
Why not neither? The greatest danger to Civilization, in my not-so-humble opinion is tribalism. My country is better. My religion. My political philosophy. My color. My sex. My gender. And I'll riot and kill if you don't agree. Capitalism? Socialism? AI? Those won't overcome the stupidity of large populations of humans.
I like to think of ancient China as the counter-example. China built a huge, self-sufficient empire. It had almost everything it needed and a stable trade network for the few things it didn't. It was well-protected by natural borders and had a large army for keeping the peace. It developed enough technology to lend it's people a relatively good standard of living. The end result was that China stagnated and lost the ~2,000 year head start they had over Europeans. China's goal was to provide stability, and it did that very well, at the cost of progress.
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#67Capitalism is danger for civilization? Writes who? A buzzfeed. A very, very leftist media site. How we end up in situation when huge portion (if not majority) of hacker community turned out to be die hard socialists ? (nowadays they call themselves social-democrats) I remember when I lived in Uzbekistan and I didn't have access to internet, I got floppy disk with saved copies of Eric Raymond articles. Once I've read…
Right now, the box we find ourselves in is a capitalist society where capitalist ideology is completely pervasive. The most powerful and dangerous authorities are corporations and excessively rich individuals. The best hopes for decentralization lie in genuinely decentralized solutions that give power back to workers, like worker cooperatives, democratic labor unions, and political protest.
What we reject is the idea that capitalism has any of the right answers here. To the left, capitalism is the primary agent of centralization of wealth and power and authority. I don't expect you to agree, but I hope you better understand where we are coming from.
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#68Runaway capitalism, oh shit. So that does that mean: - Global poverty will continue to decrease - We'll get a variety of options to choose from whenever we want to buy something - We'll get to choose how to spend our own money - We'll get quick and diligent service - If we don't like something, we can choose to stop buying it or working for them? The horror!!!!!
We'll also get highly optimized algorithms that sell us things we don't need through the use of psychology and the exploitation of human nature. We'll also get rampant misspending of scientific research funds, which will go to boner pills and hair replacement techniques, rather than curing malaria or exploring space. We'll also have the end-game for all capitalist nations be leadership that is completely bought and p…
1. Boner pills or hair replacement is worse or better than curing malaria or exploring space.
2. That the end game for every capitalist is leadership that can be paid for and bought.
3. That treating workers as useless and interchangeable cogs provide more profit than treating them fairly (assuming profit is the goal).
4. That abuse of McDonalds and Coca Cola being worse than abuse of literally anything else (Water in big enough quantities will kill you too).
5. That people are 'fucking horrible' and their second-to-second motivation is horrible.
You sound like every extreme socialist I envision. It sounds like you want a totalitarian government (made of humans) that dictate what exactly what people can do, eat and what not. It absolutely frightens me that you can condemm the entirety of the human race and also have the ability to vote.
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#69Nicely done Buzzfeed. Billionaires like Bill Gates and Elon Musk assume that a superintelligent AI will stop at nothing to achieves its goals because that’s the attitude they adopted. Kind of reminds one of Ex Machina . If amoral profit maximizers design AI, it's very possibly gonna be an amoral profit maximizer. It still irrationally bothers me after 30 years of shitty MS products and Gates literally preventing tech…
I disagree with the idea that microsoft is somehow blocking progress. Personally I'm an Arch Linux guy, but that's what works best for my job. Many people who critisize microsoft are doing it from a chair that was designed on a Windows machine, and likely assembled in a factory with machines running windows embeded. It's a good product for what it's good at.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson issued his findings of fact on November 5, 1999, which stated that Microsoft's dominance of the x86-based personal computer operating systems market constituted a monopoly, and that Microsoft had taken actions to crush threats to that monopoly, including Apple, Java, Netscape, Lotus Software, RealNetworks, Linux, and others.[15] Judgment was split in two parts. On April 3, 2000, he issued his conclusions of law, according to which Microsoft had committed monopolization, attempted monopolization, and tying in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Microsoft immediately appealed the decision.[16]
Re: The Real Danger to Civilization Isn't AI. It's Runaway Capitalism
#70Capitalism is danger for civilization? Writes who? A buzzfeed. A very, very leftist media site. How we end up in situation when huge portion (if not majority) of hacker community turned out to be die hard socialists ? (nowadays they call themselves social-democrats) I remember when I lived in Uzbekistan and I didn't have access to internet, I got floppy disk with saved copies of Eric Raymond articles. Once I've read…
This article does not say that capitalism is a danger to society, it says that Runaway Capitalism is a danger to society. I think there is a lot of evidence out there of the damage that too much free market causes, just as there is a lot of evidence for that damage that too much centralization in an economy causes. I don't disagree with you in some of these points, but I do disagree (as someone who thinks that the au…
This is an unfortunate misunderstanding of the term "capitalism". While many people who call themselves capitalists would like everyone else to think it means a free market, the capitalists themselves don't mean that. They mean simply that they acquire control of more capital, by hook or by crook. If they can most easily acquire control of more capital in a free market, they will support a free market. But historically, most capitalists have acquired more capital by buying monopoly privileges from the government, usually because they have failed in the free market and so turn to plan B: outlaw your competition.
What seems to be new about companies like Google and Facebook is that instead of buying monopoly privileges from the government, they are acquiring them, and hence control of more capital, by exploiting bugs in the human cognitive system to get people to take actions that satisfy short term needs but have potentially disastrous long term consequences. In one sense this is still a free market, since people voluntarily choose to use Google and Facebook. But in another sense it erodes a free market, by eroding trust. Unfortunately, I don't see the buzzfeed article engaging with this aspect at all.