51–60 of 233 posts
It may be superfluous to point this out but this seems to be talking about malicious uses of narrow AI, rather than malicious strong AI. The only defense against a malicious strong AI is, of course, a friendly strong AI.
It may be superfluous to point this out but this seems to be talking about malicious uses of narrow AI, rather than malicious strong AI. The only defense against a malicious strong AI is, of course, a friendly strong AI.
A JDAM through it's power supply would be an effective defense against a malicious strong AI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is one feature a blockchain excels at. People have stored the Bitcoin white paper in the blockchain. Anyone can then download it, and verify it is the untouched original.
You don’t really need the huge overhead of a block chain for that. You just need a hash and some redundant storage.
I was thinking recently, isn't any usage of Strong AI is in fact the same as slavery and, hence, immoral?
According to most humans no, because while it may possess a mind, it does not have a soul and hence can be used and exploited. This is the argument we have given ourselves over millennia to use highly intelligent animals and of course human slavery was based on the myth that Africans were sub-human and slavery was good for them. Why do you think this time will be any different?
The disturbing thing about this paper to me - flashy though it may be - is what they left out rather than what they kept in. OpenAI appears to only be thinking of the crimes-against-individuals segment of malicious AI, rather then the crimes-against-humanity type of malicious AI that the surveillance advertising corporations who are supporting OpenAI are building. I am far, far less worried about an assassin's drones…
> I'm more concerned about Google using AI to mine every conversation I've ever had or my browsing history to classify me as a dissiden before I apply for a visa to travel to China or the United States, or as a deadbeat before I apply for a bank loan, or sick before I apply for insurance, or as unrehabilitatable before I apply for parole. I'm quite paranoid about this, yet whenever I speak to people about it either p…
I've almost given up. I'm pretty much despondent at this point.
There is a booth on my way to work where they give out free Lays chips in exchange for your photo. The gimmick is that it's like a photo booth. I asked the attendant to read the privacy policy, and it's frightening, to say the least. I have no doubt that they are contracting with some AI consultant to be able to identify your face in the crowd and link it to your email address, which of course can be used to identify you freely on the Internet.
People are freely giving away their identities and their rights for a free bag of potato chips.
I always try to make sure my face is covered when I walk by it, but I can't help but despair a little when I realize that I am still surrounded by security cameras. At least one would hope that the MTA police are too busy or understaffed to do anything malicious with my face.
The disturbing thing about this paper to me - flashy though it may be - is what they left out rather than what they kept in. OpenAI appears to only be thinking of the crimes-against-individuals segment of malicious AI, rather then the crimes-against-humanity type of malicious AI that the surveillance advertising corporations who are supporting OpenAI are building. I am far, far less worried about an assassin's drones…
Evil startup idea gleaned from paper: Use AI/ML to scour a sales prospect's online persona (social media) and build a 'vulnerability profile' and generate targeted, personalized cold-emails (or even phone calls eventually). Also identifies 'levers' for a particular person that can be used to influence a buying decision. May even pre-qualify leads for you and tell you when not to waste your time :) I mean, a good sale…
The disturbing thing about this paper to me - flashy though it may be - is what they left out rather than what they kept in. OpenAI appears to only be thinking of the crimes-against-individuals segment of malicious AI, rather then the crimes-against-humanity type of malicious AI that the surveillance advertising corporations who are supporting OpenAI are building. I am far, far less worried about an assassin's drones…
How is your concern different than what they are calling political security (~1/3 of the paper)? >Political security. The use of AI to automate tasks involved in surveillance (e.g. analysing mass-collected data), persuasion (e.g. creating targeted propaganda), and deception (e.g. manipulating videos) may expand threats associated with privacy invasion and social manipulation. We also expect novel attacks that take ad…
There is no need for an evil central power targeting threats to itself, but instead we have seen/are seeing the rise pervasive blanket surveillance and classification of _all_ people in a society, even non-political actors, from many different for-profit companies. The is combined with a new type of society that is entirely dependent on corporate services for almost all functions in life (food, travel, healthcare, communications, travel, work, housing, etc). It's a recipe for disaster.
This kind of state is a _new thing_^tm and we have to be aware of it. We're the ones who are going to be oppressed by it, not just the people living under the Saddam Husseins of the world.