Live data from Hacker News

Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

techrepublic.com

41–50 of 144 posts

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#41
post #12

> mass inequality — which is getting worse How can presumably smart people still keep saying this? Inequality is decreasing by all measures! And then I'm supposed to believe any other argument this person makes...

Some people think the inequality has gone down significantly (I'm in that camp), but others point out to things like Bezos and a few others owning more assets than 80% of the world combined. Regardless, AI is bound to increase inequality. Just yesterday we discussed this book [1] on probabilistic programming here on HN [2]. That book is, by all definitions, an advanced book about AI. How many people without a PhD can…

The inequality generated by better tech largely doesn't go to engineers. They're still just knowledge workers, a class that has existed for a long time. It goes to shareholders and executives by virtue of reducing costs and generating more profit.

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#43

It's sad that a well paid person and probably smart person like Demis Hassabis is so wrong in his view about how the world is. To quote the article quoting Hassabis, "The reason I say that is that if you look at the challenges that confront society: climate change, sustainability, mass inequality — which is getting worse — diseases, and healthcare, we're not making progress anywhere near fast enough in any of these a…

[deleted]

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#44
post #12

> mass inequality — which is getting worse How can presumably smart people still keep saying this? Inequality is decreasing by all measures! And then I'm supposed to believe any other argument this person makes...

Some people think the inequality has gone down significantly (I'm in that camp), but others point out to things like Bezos and a few others owning more assets than 80% of the world combined. Regardless, AI is bound to increase inequality. Just yesterday we discussed this book [1] on probabilistic programming here on HN [2]. That book is, by all definitions, an advanced book about AI. How many people without a PhD can…

Perhaps humankind needs a "Butlerian Jihad", as defined in the Dune novels, where all machines made in the image of a human brain are banned for all time.

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#45

It's sad that a well paid person and probably smart person like Demis Hassabis is so wrong in his view about how the world is. To quote the article quoting Hassabis, "The reason I say that is that if you look at the challenges that confront society: climate change, sustainability, mass inequality — which is getting worse — diseases, and healthcare, we're not making progress anywhere near fast enough in any of these a…

> we're not making progress anywhere near fast enough in any of these areas.

Unfortunately it is true and I fully agree with this judgement.

We have already so much technology and yet there is still much poverty and misery in every country and NO (elected) government respects even the human rights.

http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/25/ex-un-chief-...

Besides, how many millions or billions of people will die until scientists have solved the aging problem ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6HyNk5Duvk&t=254

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#46
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say that your premise a) is uncontroversial - it's estimated that the global population will become stationary by 2050 or 2040, not limited by simply lots of people being born and even more dieing from starvation but a globally decreasing birth rate. I.e. people adapt to the environment by having fewer children, because they don't need as many for their family to survive.

2050 the population will be 20% more than current levels we already are producing more carbon and other polutants than the world can handle . It does not matter if the population will stagnate in the future as current population is already to high.

#TeamThanos

There is a huge difference between the population flattening out and continuing to grow strongly. Whilst you are broadly correct, that we need to solve for 120% current - that's obviously easier than solving for 200% current.

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#47
post #45

It's sad that a well paid person and probably smart person like Demis Hassabis is so wrong in his view about how the world is. To quote the article quoting Hassabis, "The reason I say that is that if you look at the challenges that confront society: climate change, sustainability, mass inequality — which is getting worse — diseases, and healthcare, we're not making progress anywhere near fast enough in any of these a…

> we're not making progress anywhere near fast enough in any of these areas. Unfortunately it is true and I fully agree with this judgement. We have already so much technology and yet there is still much poverty and misery in every country and NO (elected) government respects even the human rights. http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/25/ex-un-chief-...…

Well, we could go on and both claim our statements are true. OR you just follow the link of my initial post and read a book that simply states facts published by the UN, and you would see for yourself that the rates of poverty, child mortality and mass inequality have become much better in the course of the last 30-50 years.

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#48
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we're not making progress anywhere near fast enough in any of these areas. Unfortunately it is true and I fully agree with this judgement. We have already so much technology and yet there is still much poverty and misery in every country and NO (elected) government respects even the human rights. http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/25/ex-un-chief-...…

Well, we could go on and both claim our statements are true. OR you just follow the link of my initial post and read a book that simply states facts published by the UN, and you would see for yourself that the rates of poverty, child mortality and mass inequality have become much better in the course of the last 30-50 years.

The only reason why both of our statements are true is because "fast enough" or "not fast enough" is a personal opinion.

I believe in the benefits of technology.

The reason for current misery is not only lack of knowledge (scientific) and technology (e.g. in psychology and psychiatry) but also lack of knowledge (economic) and bad morality as proven by the kind of societies and elected governments in 2018.

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#49
I always find it strange to hear people talk about climate change as if it is some sort of tricky challenge we need to solve, like improving education or curing cancer. It is a 'problem' of completely different magnitude. It is on track to end civilization as we know it within two generations. A rational society would think about nothing else.

Our children will be astonished and mystified - and furious - to see all the things we got up to instead of dealing with this thing that is the only thing that matters.

Re: Google DeepMind Founder Demis Hassabis: Three Truths about AI

#50

It's sad that a well paid person and probably smart person like Demis Hassabis is so wrong in his view about how the world is. To quote the article quoting Hassabis, "The reason I say that is that if you look at the challenges that confront society: climate change, sustainability, mass inequality — which is getting worse — diseases, and healthcare, we're not making progress anywhere near fast enough in any of these a…

For climate change we're not even close to making enough progress. Global CO2 emissions are expected to continue rising for the foreseeable future, so we're not even getting the second derivative right. The chances are close to zero that we'll manage to limit warming to two degrees and imho it's likely that we'll set off some feedback loops (melting permafrost, methane clathrates, albedo changes at the poles, etc.) that will lead to catastrophic warming in the next century.
Post reply on HN