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

Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

sanders.senate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#41

Post by philipov »

slibhb wrote: post #24
smokedetector1 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is either a troll or a shockingly naive understanding of how scarce resources are allocated

"Technology will free mankind from labor and usher in an era where everyone is simply allocated whatever they requre" was a staple of leftism up until the USSR collapsed. The difference is that today, unlike in the 20th century, there's a feasible path to post-scarcity. It's not "around the corner" but there's a path if you squint. Myabe it won't pan out, but it's worth a shot. The irony is that leftists want to ban…

There is no such thing as a post-scarcity world. Some resources are inherently scarce, such as social status, lifetime, or political power. As a result, even when productivity increases the benefits are hoarded by the few who wish to stand above all others. This has always held true regardless of political system.

If it weren't for that, we already live in a post-scarcity world. But as such a state is anathema to the human condition, we continually strive to create new forms of scarcity that can separate the elite from the commons.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#42

Post by josh_p »

hackingonempty wrote: post #25

In the USA, thousands of people are killed every year by car drivers. This is tolerated without a peep, relatively speaking, even though 20 times as many pedestrians are killed by drivers as are killed by mass shootings that dominate the news and voter issues. So I predict the number of people we will tolerate being killed every year to have good AI will be more than zero, much more.

We decided after the Sandy Hook massacre that it was okay for a few kids to die in shootings every year so that people could keep their gun rights. Thank the gun lobby.

You can thank the Oil and Car lobby groups for Congress' silence on car issues.

As long as that sweet sweet blood money keeps flowing into the pockets of politicians, nothing will get better.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#43

Post by ronsor »

qda34h wrote: post #35
bigyabai wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence that "all labor" could be done by AI? It doesn't seem to me like we have any guarantee that AI will contribute to public wellbeing. Right now, the public is socializing the losses while the industry privatizes the technology and cozies up to the federal government. LLMs will be usable for mass surveillance and war long before it ever leads us to a post-scarcity society.

Brutal downvoting again by Big-AI PR agencies, maybe automated by now. If anyone can name a rational reason why the top comment is the top comment but this one deserves -4, please say so.

HN has plenty of comments critical of AI training and AI in general. I don't think "Big AI" has downvote bot armies here, or if there are, they really need improvement because they clearly haven't been working lately.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#44

Post by slibhb »

csh0 wrote: post #37
slibhb wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Technology will free mankind from labor and usher in an era where everyone is simply allocated whatever they requre" was a staple of leftism up until the USSR collapsed. The difference is that today, unlike in the 20th century, there's a feasible path to post-scarcity. It's not "around the corner" but there's a path if you squint. Myabe it won't pan out, but it's worth a shot. The irony is that leftists want to ban…

I think the difficulty for many people is not imagining a path to post-scarcity, per se, but instead that they have been given no commitments by their government or business leaders that they will get to benefit from it, after it is achieved. It’s one thing to say something like: AI will enable lights out manufacturing and replace virtually all employees in that sector. To which those employees respond: What will hap…

> Do you see the missing link there? They might ask: “What happens to those goods? What happens to me? Do I get given the goods? Are the goods sold and then I am paid a stipend? I’m hungry. Will I still need to buy things? Okay, if so, but I have no money because I was fired.”

This process will take generations. Over time, people will work less and less as productivity steadily increases (we already see this in the pre-AI era as technology has accumulated). Eventually, AI will do all necessary labor and goods/services will be incredibly cheap. Over the decades, as this situation develops, our governments will become more socialist/redistributionist.

Also, it's possible that this technology just doesn't pan out. There could be a bottleneck or a nuclear war or whatever. Maybe it just stops scaling, or it stays in the realm of text-generation and can't replace manual labor. But it's worth a shot, and leftists should get on board.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#45

Post by Legend2440 »

csh0 wrote: post #37
slibhb wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Technology will free mankind from labor and usher in an era where everyone is simply allocated whatever they requre" was a staple of leftism up until the USSR collapsed. The difference is that today, unlike in the 20th century, there's a feasible path to post-scarcity. It's not "around the corner" but there's a path if you squint. Myabe it won't pan out, but it's worth a shot. The irony is that leftists want to ban…

I think the difficulty for many people is not imagining a path to post-scarcity, per se, but instead that they have been given no commitments by their government or business leaders that they will get to benefit from it, after it is achieved. It’s one thing to say something like: AI will enable lights out manufacturing and replace virtually all employees in that sector. To which those employees respond: What will hap…

Well, historically, it's sort of worked out on its own. Automation displaces workers but also creates new jobs in other sectors. We have maintained full employment at higher wages.

That said, some displaced workers have experienced substantial difficulty moving to other industries, especially if those new jobs are in different cities or countries. And it is also possible that this time is different, although I'm not convinced.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#46

Post by Legend2440 »

Varelion wrote: post #29
Legend2440 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Anybody who disagrees with the ban on superintelligence in principle, maybe not in practice, is a traitor to humanity Oh, so anybody who disagrees with me is evil? This is the kind of attitude that ruined US politics.

You are short-sighted to think that. What ruined US politics is the cycle of greed and money.

Greed and money aren't helping. There is no single cause for anything.

But the fact that both liberals and conservatives think of the other as 'evil' is a large problem.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#47

Post by slibhb »

philipov wrote: post #41
slibhb wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Technology will free mankind from labor and usher in an era where everyone is simply allocated whatever they requre" was a staple of leftism up until the USSR collapsed. The difference is that today, unlike in the 20th century, there's a feasible path to post-scarcity. It's not "around the corner" but there's a path if you squint. Myabe it won't pan out, but it's worth a shot. The irony is that leftists want to ban…

There is no such thing as a post-scarcity world. Some resources are inherently scarce, such as social status, lifetime, or political power. As a result, even when productivity increases the benefits are hoarded by the few who wish to stand above all others. This has always held true regardless of political system. If it weren't for that, we already live in a post-scarcity world. But as such a state is anathema to the…

Scarcity of status, fame, power, etc may be inevitable -- but that's fine. After all, people need stuff to do.

But if we solve food, hunger, housing, education, healthcare, and entertainment then that's enough for me. And no, it's not "the current political system" that prevents us from solving those problems now. Rather it's that engine of production is human labor, which forces us to rely on incentives.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#48

Post by GPerson »

Legend2440 wrote: post #38
GPerson wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You actually support an intelligence beyond human control. Yes, you are evil. Anyone who supports anything that will obviously end humanity is evil. Notice I did not comment on pausing AI and I said ‘in principle’.

It's not going to end humanity. We're going to use it to do incredible things that would otherwise be forever beyond our ability - a post-work economy, science fiction technologies, advanced mathematics, etc.

We can do that without superintelligence. There’s no reason to have an independently acting AI which is out of control.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#49

Post by GPerson »

Gooblebrai wrote: post #39
GPerson wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You actually support an intelligence beyond human control. Yes, you are evil. Anyone who supports anything that will obviously end humanity is evil. Notice I did not comment on pausing AI and I said ‘in principle’.

From > intelligence beyond human control. (1) to > that will obviously end humanity (2) There's quite an assumption on the feasibility of (1) and even a bigger jump that from (1) follows (2) Some people can have less apocalyptic / more pragmatic views of the potential of AI.

Your AI utopia requires an independently acting autonomous agent? What is the purpose of that?

And you are not seriously engaging with anything I’ve written I’ll add. The definition Bernie Sanders has for superintelligence involves it having the capability to “plan and execute the disempowerment of humanity”. That is going to lead to the end of humanity but feel free to quibble in support of what Sanders had set up as obviously severely undesirable.

Re: Sanders introduces bill to ban artificial superintelligence and pause AI

#50

Post by philipov »

slibhb wrote: post #47
philipov wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such thing as a post-scarcity world. Some resources are inherently scarce, such as social status, lifetime, or political power. As a result, even when productivity increases the benefits are hoarded by the few who wish to stand above all others. This has always held true regardless of political system. If it weren't for that, we already live in a post-scarcity world. But as such a state is anathema to the…

Scarcity of status, fame, power, etc may be inevitable -- but that's fine. After all, people need stuff to do. But if we solve food, hunger, housing, education, healthcare, and entertainment then that's enough for me. And no, it's not "the current political system" that prevents us from solving those problems now. Rather it's that engine of production is human labor, which forces us to rely on incentives.

When was the last time the United States had a famine caused by there not being enough food rather than because we decided certain people don't deserve food? Everything you named is a political problem caused by the desire to concentrate status, fame, and power. These are not problems that lack a technological solution.
Post reply on HN