Live data from Hacker News

Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

betterwithout.ai

11–20 of 130 posts

Re: Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

#11
"Most AI researchers think good outcomes are more likely. This seems just blind faith, though"

Or, you know, they might actually know something about the subject? On a similar note, most physicists don't think particle colliders will cause mini black holes which will swallow the Earth, but the fear gets repeated by non-physicists.

Re: Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

#13

Good satire; thought it was real until I got to “We don’t know how our AI systems work, we don’t know what they can do,” I look forward to the stupid phase of mistakes with AI. Because it surely has to be better than the past decade of free money devoted almost exclusively to advertising optimization and tightening of controls.

This doesn't look like satire. Too much work went into it, and the author seems to be sincere.

Re: Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

#14

"Most AI researchers think good outcomes are more likely. This seems just blind faith, though" Or, you know, they might actually know something about the subject? On a similar note, most physicists don't think particle colliders will cause mini black holes which will swallow the Earth, but the fear gets repeated by non-physicists.

Did you miss this paragraph from the same page?

> I am not a Luddite. I have been wildly enthusiastic about science, technology, and intellectual and material progress since I was a kid. I have a PhD in artificial intelligence, and I find the current breakthroughs fascinating.

Re: Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

#16
Anti-AI seems poised to be the anti-vax of the next few years, where laymen pick up lines like "we have no idea how AI does the stuff it does" and take that wholly out of context. As a society, we have to decide how we feel about AI in legal and cultural contexts as we expand our capabilities, but there's time to do that. Github Copilot will not end up launching nuclear missiles in the meantime. Stuff like this just creates FUD.

I don't know what to make of this, though. This author, after some googling, seems to know a thing or two, but without any background on him while reading some of this he came off to me as a crackpot. I really hope AI doesn't have its Robert Malone.

Re: Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

#17
post #6

If AI was capable of building physical things and carrying out physical tasks in the real world, no one would probably complain. But when AI decides to speak and create artwork, people lose their minds.

Because our miracle was for robots to do tedious tasks and humans enjoy creative work. But it turns out that the future will be the opposite.

That's a very interesting observation that I had not seen before.

Re: Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

#18
I think this is pointless, even if somewhat more refined than the common tropes about AI apocalypse.

The risk of building a gigantic machine (not in the literal sense) that is detrimental to humans is very real and I think that each time our societies are becoming _too_ organized or optimized we're also removing most of the individual freedom as a side effect.

Insane concentration of power is not a new phenomenon, but for sure this new tech could amplify/accelerate it.

But I don't see how we can avoid exploring this path, there is too much to learn.

Re: Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

#19
"Governments will take radical actions that make no sense to their own leaders. Corporations, guided by artificial intelligence, will find their own strategies incomprehensible. University curricula will turn bizarre and irrelevant." Uhuh, so what would be the difference?

Re: Only You Can Stop an AI Apocalypse

#20

The same internet technology that empowers AI also empowers weird self-published stuff like this. The author should reflect on that.

The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

Of course they do. The ability to publish believable nonsense that empowers bad AIs like ChatGPT also empowers human crank authors. Before the internet, neither would have had an easy time publishing.
Post reply on HN