One of the sad things about tech is that nobody really looks at history. The same kinds of essays were written about trains, planes and nuclear power. Before lindbergh went off the deepend, he was convinced that "airmen" were gentlemen and could sort out the world's ills. The essay contains a lot of coulds, but doesn't touch on the base problem: human nature. AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of j…
Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
101–110 of 132 posts
Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#102This is basically the tech CEO's version of the book of revelations: "AI will soon come and make everything right with the world, help us and you will be rewarded with a Millennium of bliss in It's presence". I won't comment on the plausibility of what is being said, but regardless, one should beware this type of reasoning. Any action can be justified, if it means bringing about an infinite good. Relevant read: https…
Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#103This is basically the tech CEO's version of the book of revelations: "AI will soon come and make everything right with the world, help us and you will be rewarded with a Millennium of bliss in It's presence". I won't comment on the plausibility of what is being said, but regardless, one should beware this type of reasoning. Any action can be justified, if it means bringing about an infinite good. Relevant read: https…
Any attempt to connect this to the book of revelations is strained. Amodei uses reasoning and is willing to be corrected and revised; quite the opposite of most “divinely revealed” texts.
Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#104The more recent and consistent rule of technological development, “ For to those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away.”
Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#105does anybody really want a fricking robot serving them drinks at a bar. maybe the bro culture of SF
That's not the question, the question is the ratio between those-who-want-to-serve and those-who-want-to-be-served.
People want people handling their food, at least in the part they can see. And for the parts they can't see, like bottling their beers, the automation has already happened, and it didn't require 80 exahertz of compute, just a bunch of industrial engineers.
Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#106The linked article is worth reading. Apologies for sounding so dismissive, but after putting in a lot of study myself, I want to warn people here: HN is not a great place for discussing AI safety. As of this writing, I’ve found minimal value in the comments here. A curious and truth-seeking reader should find better forums and sources. I recommend seeking out a structured introduction from experts. One could do worse…
Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#107Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#108The linked article is worth reading. Apologies for sounding so dismissive, but after putting in a lot of study myself, I want to warn people here: HN is not a great place for discussing AI safety. As of this writing, I’ve found minimal value in the comments here. A curious and truth-seeking reader should find better forums and sources. I recommend seeking out a structured introduction from experts. One could do worse…
The examples you mentioned: youtube, and a textbook; are not places to discuss, they are assymmetrical ways to consume information, with little input from the reader's part. Have you ever had a meaningful discussion in youtube comments?
Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#109Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
The examples you mentioned: youtube, and a textbook; are not places to discuss, they are assymmetrical ways to consume information, with little input from the reader's part. Have you ever had a meaningful discussion in youtube comments?
There are great places to discuss AI safety out there, but every time they get mentioned on Hacker News they are subject to sneering middlebrow dismissals. That's sort of the OP's point: this is not a great place to discuss or even meta-discuss the subject.
Like where?