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

Experts pledge to rein in AI research

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 77 posts

Re: Experts pledge to rein in AI research

#41

Post by marvin »

faizshah wrote: post #18

I don't know much about the philosophy of AI and I'm only familiar at a basic level with modern AI algorithms. From what I have been exposed to I don't see any reason to think AI is any more than a set of statistical frameworks. Is there any reason to believe that these statistical frameworks are comparable to biological intelligence? Am I thinking about this the wrong way?

In this context, the term "Artificial Intelligence" refers to a man-built emulation of the physical process that allows humans to reason and shape the world around us in pursuit of our goals. This hasn't been achieved yet, but humans are proof that it is physically possible. (And through evolution, which is not a strongly guided process).

Unless you believe there is something inherently special and unique about humans that make it impossible for this physical phenomenon to be replicated artificially, there is absolutely something to worry about here.

Re: Experts pledge to rein in AI research

#42

Post by Swizec »

faizshah wrote: post #31
harshreality wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you're talking about the kinds of AI in use today? That's not what the cautions are about, since current "AI" however good at reading individual words or flying drones is not yet capable of human-level thought. The cautions are about trans-sapient AI, which doesn't exist yet. Even if it's simply a beefed up "set of statistical frameworks" linked in the right way to get a computer behave like a human, h…

I see, I didn't think about that. So you mean AI that are not necessarily intelligent or conscious but are just more integrated in our lives, for example in the military or law enforcement? I can see how a bug in those kinds of systems could cause things like that without necessarily being conscious or intelligent.

The implication is that humans are just statistical algorithms. We have so far not found any evidence to the contrary.

Re: Experts pledge to rein in AI research

#43

Post by ThomPete »

maaaats wrote: post #7

I wonder: Why should we care about what Musk and Hawking mean about AI? This article doesn't mention too much bad stuff, but earlier they have said that we should be afraid of AI/singularity. With my thesis now in AI, I probably know far more than those two about this. And we're sooo far away from AI being a superforce destroying mankind.

I haven't read your thesis but does it take things like exponential progress, deep learning and higher and higher privileges and control over infrastructure into account?

It doesn't have to be conscious to be dangerous.

Re: Experts pledge to rein in AI research

#44

Post by nhaehnle »

rndn wrote: post #15
bulletsvshumans wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a tax on AI that goes towards unemployment benefits of some kind?

I think, the perceived danger here is more the lack of social acceptance of unemployed people. I think however, that if a large part or even a majority of the population is unemployable it will necessarily lead to social acceptance. People will simply have a lot of leisure time.

It is not just social acceptance, though. It is also the problem that one's livelihood is closely tied to one's employment.

With both these things, the question is how the social acceptance and the detachment of livelihood from employment comes about. Will it require revolutions and civil war with accompanying bloodshed when the downtrodden unemployed rise up? Or will we be collectively smart enough to reform our economic systems before the rift through society becomes too deep?

Re: Experts pledge to rein in AI research

#45

Post by verbin217 »

lukasm wrote: post #40
bulletsvshumans wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a tax on AI that goes towards unemployment benefits of some kind?

Money is not the only problem. Unemployment leads to loneliness, demotivation, social stigma. This is not only caused by social pressure to have a job. Even rich people work. We need some form of Minimal Activity. The letter will have no effect. Similarly, you can sing a letter to stop drugs.

In a world where unemployment was more pervasive and expected it likely wouldn't be that way.

Re: Experts pledge to rein in AI research

#47

Post by IgorPartola »

bsaunder wrote: post #9

"In the short term, this could mean research into the economic effects of AI to stop smart systems putting millions of people out of work." This seems unfortunate and somewhat challenging to do. Our current economic model encourages improving efficiency of systems. This seems like a good thing. Its really too bad that people "need" jobs. Jobs should be creating value or they shouldn't exist. Artificially "creating" j…

We are now entering a new age where our current form of capitalism will not work. You see, when there was enough demand on the workforce (as in, there was as much or more work to do than there were workers), things worked reasonably well. Now we are entering an era where there is much less demand for workers, yet we are not yet productive enough to just sit back, relax, and let machines handle 99.9%+ of the work.

Think about it: 50% unemployment is terrible. 100% unemployment is not unemployment. It means there are enough resources to go around that nobody has to work. There is so much food, shelter, and entertainment that we don't need to get up in the morning and go to work.

Obviously, 100% unemployment cannot happen. In all likelyhood, we'll still need doctors, chefs, artists, etc. But that the direction we are going in, and we better figure out how to set up a new economy to adapt to the new realities.

I envision a shift in the mind set. Personally, if I have more money then I could spend in a lifetime, and choose to work to make myself even richer, I don't care if 10 other families are living off my wealth. People will have a choice: do something productive for society, and live a slightly better lifestyle, or pursue more personal fulfillment. We'll see a lot more artists, and a lot less custodians. In the long run, I believe this shift will be a good thing, but it will require us to stop using terms like "moocher class".

Re: Experts pledge to rein in AI research

#49

Post by walterbell »

drcomputer wrote: post #29
jacquesm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll have AI working the other side of the arms race just the same. Tools aren't just used by the good guys.

That won't stop the bad guys from making those tools while the good guys don't, because they are afraid their tools will be used by the bad guys. Ignorance is not a good defense strategy.

Inadvertent bad guys (good intentions with unpredictable errors) can be more damaging than intentional attacks.

Re: Experts pledge to rein in AI research

#50

Post by blfr »

amelius wrote: post #22

Why not do the same with all of technology? Why do shareholders of big corporations profit from science in a grossly non-proportional way, while more than 50% of world's population has to live on under $2 a day? It is time for the world's greatest minds to start thinking about how to fix capitalism, because it seems to be seriously broken. And we need it fixed more than we need e.g. iPhone 7.0, or Google Adwords 2.0.

Coming from a formerly communist country, I have a severe distrust towards "great minds" with some radical fix for capitalism.

Actually, we should start treating social fixes like we do technical rollouts. Prove it on a small scale somewhere first, and then carefully expand.

This seems like common sense. Yet for some reason changes in policies tend to be sweeping, national or even international.

Post reply on HN