Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

the-american-interest.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 69 posts

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#21

Post by windsurfer »

bko wrote: post #13
windsurfer wrote: post #6

This article completely misses what I see as the biggest problem with intelligence in machines: Corporations can use them to be unaccountable. Insider trading? No, that was our "algorithm". Racist policies? Oops, sorry that was just our bot. Inhumane practices? Sorry, we are still "working" on our artificial intelligence since you know it's very difficult. Where most people see mysterious advanced help in day to day…

> Corporations can use them to be unaccountable. Insider trading? No, that was our "algorithm". Racist policies? Oops, sorry that was just our bot. I would say the opposite. Insider trading? No, here are the inputs to our algorithm. Racist policies? No, here are the inputs to our algorithm.

And tell me, how can you verify that these were the inputs used? How can you check to see how those inputs were used within the algorithm? How can you audit such a system?

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#22

Post by azdacha »

rpmisms wrote: post #4

My problem with these articles isn't that they overestimate AI, but that they underestimate humanity. Yes, many millenials have a serious electronics addiction, but many Gen Z kids are really good about managing their screen time, and try to make face-to-face communication happen more and more. tl;dr: Humanity is really good at adapting to coexist with technology. Stop Panicking.

What about all other thechnological controversy ? Everything is not about Screen-Time.

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#23

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

windsurfer wrote: post #6

This article completely misses what I see as the biggest problem with intelligence in machines: Corporations can use them to be unaccountable. Insider trading? No, that was our "algorithm". Racist policies? Oops, sorry that was just our bot. Inhumane practices? Sorry, we are still "working" on our artificial intelligence since you know it's very difficult. Where most people see mysterious advanced help in day to day…

This already happens. It's actually bureaucracy, but it's rarely called that.

Try dealing with YouTube after a fraudulent copyright strike, or getting money from Amazon or PayPal after your account has been suspended for an arbitrary reason.

AI has the potential to automate bureaucratic corporate hostility and indifference to weaponised levels.

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#24

Post by xwdv »

windsurfer wrote: post #21
bko wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Corporations can use them to be unaccountable. Insider trading? No, that was our "algorithm". Racist policies? Oops, sorry that was just our bot. I would say the opposite. Insider trading? No, here are the inputs to our algorithm. Racist policies? No, here are the inputs to our algorithm.

And tell me, how can you verify that these were the inputs used? How can you check to see how those inputs were used within the algorithm? How can you audit such a system?

You rebuild the system using the same inputs and initial conditions and observe the outcome. Thank you, next.

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#25

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

unwoundmouse wrote: post #8
bko wrote: post #2

> Even lovemaking is at risk, as artificially intelligent robots stand poised to enter the market and provide sexual services and romantic intimacy. This perfectly encapsulates why I'm so skeptical of AI alarmists. They tend to boil down the human experience to such coarse terms that it undermines their legitimate issues. > AI is a collection of passive silicon and metal. It does not speak. It has no mind. Like an oc…

And humans are not just a series of numbers?

No. There is absolutely no empirical evidence that consciousness is just a series of numbers.

There's an assumption that consciousness is just a series of numbers, and some more or less credible philosophical arguments for/against this point of view.

But believing there's more than that is faith-based, not empirical.

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#26

Post by xwdv »

pjc50 wrote: post #19
bko wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who said anything about prudishness? I'm saying that there is a deeper connection people make with other human beings, rather than some inanimate piece of matter.

However, making a real connection is difficult, and there's a huge profit potential in selling people (usually, but not exclusively, men) a fake connection. At what point do AIs start passing the "phone sex Turing test"? That is one of the things people are explicitly worried about: the possibility that they might make a connection with someone they're communicating with over the internet and then discover it's not a…

I don’t see why there is any need to worry about that, you can make fake connections with a real person to. They might be your world but from their end they might not actually give a fuck about you, they just pretend they do. Ever get worried about that?

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#27

Post by naasking »

xwdv wrote: post #24
windsurfer wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And tell me, how can you verify that these were the inputs used? How can you check to see how those inputs were used within the algorithm? How can you audit such a system?

You rebuild the system using the same inputs and initial conditions and observe the outcome. Thank you, next.

Talk about underplaying the difficulties. Computer science needed a whole new package system (Nix) just to guarantee reproducible builds. Compilation is pretty much the definition of a pure input/output function, and most builds are simply not reproducible. If even builds aren't reproducible, good luck reproducing anything more complex like machine learning.

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#28

Post by hprotagonist »

dagw wrote: post #10
hprotagonist wrote: post #7

Yet not only does AI win at cards now, it also creates art, writes poetry, and performs psychotherapy. Those are shockingly broad claims that are not even close to being accepted by even a minority of people.

AIs can absolutely do all those things. The question is if they can do it well enough to be of any value.

i believe this is a category error. AI is not sentient or aware, it defintionally cannot “do” anything.

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#29

Post by bart_spoon »

bko wrote: post #13
windsurfer wrote: post #6

This article completely misses what I see as the biggest problem with intelligence in machines: Corporations can use them to be unaccountable. Insider trading? No, that was our "algorithm". Racist policies? Oops, sorry that was just our bot. Inhumane practices? Sorry, we are still "working" on our artificial intelligence since you know it's very difficult. Where most people see mysterious advanced help in day to day…

> Corporations can use them to be unaccountable. Insider trading? No, that was our "algorithm". Racist policies? Oops, sorry that was just our bot. I would say the opposite. Insider trading? No, here are the inputs to our algorithm. Racist policies? No, here are the inputs to our algorithm.

How would that solve anything? Most machine learning algorithms being used today are black boxes and the people implementing them often have little understanding of exactly what transformations the model ends up making between the inputs and the outputs. Its entirely possible for seemingly-innocuous inputs to pick up outright problematic features (i.e. skin color from a photo id) or indirectly problematic features (i.e. income level and address located in an area predominantly populated by minorities) that its outputs hinge on.

If anything, the issues with machine learning are even more problematic that what the OP posted, as simply identifying that something like systemic racism in a machine learning model can be very hard to identify.

Re: Artificial Intelligence: What’s to Fear?

#30

Post by xwdv »

naasking wrote: post #27
xwdv wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You rebuild the system using the same inputs and initial conditions and observe the outcome. Thank you, next.

Talk about underplaying the difficulties. Computer science needed a whole new package system (Nix) just to guarantee reproducible builds. Compilation is pretty much the definition of a pure input/output function, and most builds are simply not reproducible. If even builds aren't reproducible, good luck reproducing anything more complex like machine learning.

Auditing is a complicated process, if you don’t want to do the work you’ll just have to take their word for it.
Post reply on HN