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

Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 129 posts

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#101

Post by rlayton2 »

bilbo0s wrote: post #80
scottlocklin wrote: post #45

"Will emerging technologies make the state system obsolete? It’s hard to see why not." Yeah, it's hard to see why not if your view of technology is something like that of medieval demonology, which appears to be the thesis of this article. Meanwhile, in reality land, you can make explosives and poison gas out of stuff in your kitchen, automobiles put a ridiculous amount of kinetic energy in the hands of individuals,…

> automobiles put a ridiculous amount of kinetic energy in the hands of individuals, this has been true for 100 years, and somehow "the state system" has done just fine; strengthened even in that period of time. Yep. States figured out how to turn automobiles into tanks, essentially strengthening their power. Yet the article implicitly posits that somehow the same won't happen with microprocessors and nanomachines? T…

Yeah, this is a common fallacy, I'm sure there would be a name for it. Basically "my strategy will work, assuming my opponent doesn't act at all", and ignores the fact the opponent is a capable, well resourced entity.

Many bitcoin proponents have the same fallacy - i.e. "this is better than banks, therefore banks are obsolete", ignoring the fact that banks will work with new technology as it suits them.

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#102

Post by morningseagulls »

anigbrowl wrote: post #76
DSingularity wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like this "panopticon" but I don't think suggesting it as a solution makes the author an "aspiring" fascist.

If your best idea is to refashion the world as a giant prison camp, that's pretty fascist whether or not one likes to think of oneself that way; if Bostrom thinks it's a necessity but doesn't believe it to be fascist because he personally does not wish to wield power over people then that's just idiotically fascist. (There's a viable side argument here about the difference between totalitarianism and fascism as one k…

>This struck me as a warmed-over version of the literary conceit that we're all just characters in a particularly elaborate-seeming novel or stage play.

He also came up with the notion of apocalyptic "superintelligences"[0], which is a warmed-over version of 20th-century critiques of the corporation, starting with one written by an economist and a lawyer[1]. People like Cory Doctorow[2], Ted Chiang[3] and Charlie Stross[4] have pointed out the similarities.

>He's terribly clever but also deeply neurotic, like a pessimistic Ray Kurzweil (whose prediction record is rather better than he gets credit for, but similarly dwells a little too much in his own imagination).

He's a transhumanist[5] who co-founded the WTA (now Humanity+)[6] in 1998. I think he's probably realised along the way that doom and gloom sells: he founded FHI in 2005[7] and inspired Musk to fund CSER in 2012[8] with his book[0]. It's pretty much his day job now to be deeply pessimistic.

And it looks like doom-and-gloom think tanks are catching on: France is apparently hiring science fiction writers to dream up future threats[9]. Nice job if you can get it, I guess.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence:_Paths,_Dang...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Modern_Corporation_and_Pri...

[2] https://boingboing.net/2015/07/03/why-were-still-talking-abo...

[3] https://boingboing.net/2017/12/18/skynet-llc.html

[4] https://boingboing.net/2017/12/29/llcs-are-slow-ais.html

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism#Growth_of_transh...

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanity%2B

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_of_Humanity_Institute

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_for_the_Study_of_Existe...

[9] https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/24/20708432/france-military-...

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#103

Post by m463 »

tedajax wrote: post #2

Literally nothing in this article seems like something that will actually come to pass. It's like a bad Black Mirror fanfic.

I thought drones in warzones have already been used to target people and explode at head level.

Maybe not crates of miniaturized ones with facial recognition, but precursors.

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#104

Post by morningseagulls »

scottlocklin wrote: post #45

"Will emerging technologies make the state system obsolete? It’s hard to see why not." Yeah, it's hard to see why not if your view of technology is something like that of medieval demonology, which appears to be the thesis of this article. Meanwhile, in reality land, you can make explosives and poison gas out of stuff in your kitchen, automobiles put a ridiculous amount of kinetic energy in the hands of individuals,…

>Also Bostrom is a nincompoop and no article that mentions him deserves to be taken seriously.

Agreed, and as I've pointed out elsewhere[0] (see also the parent comment[1]), his ideas are also not that new. I think it's quite sad that people somehow think that, because it shows how history -- even the development of ideas in the 20th century -- can be so easily forgotten.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21319970

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21319584

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#105

Post by winfred »

glangdale wrote: post #56

Amusing to picture our "3" terrorists carefully assembling 10m drones, each with a 1g shaped charge on it - or does the author think this is something that you can just order from some factory in China, along with the 10 tons of plastic explosive. It seems to be that anyone sophisticated enough to put 10 tons of plastic explosive in any form wherever they feel like is already quite capable of causing massive casualti…

Sounds like a James Bond plot to me.

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#106

Post by jessaustin »

trentnix wrote: post #98
jessaustin wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's not why Google are doing it. Perhaps I'm mistaken about their motivations?!?

Motivations? Every fascist is convinced of the purity and necessity of their motivations. And eventually maintaining power becomes the overriding motivation...for the children, for the common good, for the poor, for the planet, and all that.

(Google are doing it for the money.)

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#107

Post by lotu »

Felz wrote: post #53
XorNot wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean if you barred the doors to a theater and tossed a few gallons of bleach and vinegar in you could also just gas hundreds of people, but it doesn't happen. We worry a lot about technology because the attacks sound novel, but not about the conventional ones which still (mostly) don't happen because the reality is that the actual logistical challenges of implementing them without security services noticing still h…

I think the real limiter is people willing and stable enough to murder indiscriminately at scale in novel ways. Mowing down crowds of people with a truck is bizarrely recent, and the peak of mass murder is still one guy sniping at a concert from a nearby hotel. Everyone was relatively surprised that passenger planes could be used as destructive weapons. The really effective means of mass murder I think would be subtl…

Or maybe something like developing, manufacturing, and prompting a new pain pill, that gets millions of people addicted to opioids, thus ultimately resulting of millions of overdose death over a decade.

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#108

Post by lotu »

m463 wrote: post #103
tedajax wrote: post #2

Literally nothing in this article seems like something that will actually come to pass. It's like a bad Black Mirror fanfic.

I thought drones in warzones have already been used to target people and explode at head level. Maybe not crates of miniaturized ones with facial recognition, but precursors.

The scale is so different that it’s not really the same thing. It’s like comparing a mortar to an orbital bombardment with rail-guns. Yes both involve sending a projectile at a target at high speed but they aren’t remotely similar.

Re: Omniviolence Is Coming and the World Isn’t Ready

#110

Post by soganess »

n-exploit wrote: post #96
scottlocklin wrote: post #45

"Will emerging technologies make the state system obsolete? It’s hard to see why not." Yeah, it's hard to see why not if your view of technology is something like that of medieval demonology, which appears to be the thesis of this article. Meanwhile, in reality land, you can make explosives and poison gas out of stuff in your kitchen, automobiles put a ridiculous amount of kinetic energy in the hands of individuals,…

"Will emerging technologies make the state system obsolete? It’s hard to see why not." Honest question - could the U.S. Government be considered an Abstract State Machine?

If you squint, I could buy that as a way of describing the execution of policy (a state machine could, for example, oversee wealth redistribution payments) but not as a description of policy making entities.
Post reply on HN