The AI Anxiety (washingtonpost.com)

An anonymous reader writes: The Washington Post has an article about current and near-future AI research while managing to keep a level head about it: "The machines are not on the verge of taking over. This is a topic rife with speculation and perhaps a whiff of hysteria." Every so often, we hear seemingly dire warnings from people like Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk about the dangers of unchecked AI research. But actual experts continue to dismiss such worries as premature — and not just slightly premature. The article suggests our concerns might be better focused in a different direction: "Anyone looking for something to worry about in the near future might want to consider the opposite of superintelligence: superstupidity. In our increasingly technological society, we rely on complex systems that are vulnerable to failure in complex and unpredictable ways. Deepwater oil wells can blow out and take months to be resealed. Nuclear power reactors can melt down. Rockets can explode. How might intelligent machines fail — and how catastrophic might those failures be?"

Comments

documentary about superstupidity

[Anonymous Coward]

opposite of superintelligence: superstupidity

There's been a great documentary made about superstupidity..

Re:documentary about superstupidity

[Tablizer]

There's an "automation-related" saying that dates back to at least the 70's:

"To err is human; to really foul things up you need a computer."

Re:We know about superstupidity from seeingWashing

[matbury]

> "Anyone looking for something to worry about in the near future might want to consider the opposite of superintelligence: superstupidity"

At least we know what superstupidity looks like and what it does, based on observing Washington, DC. One lesson is to minimize the control and possible impact from failures of these complex but inherently stupid systems. See, for example the office of the vice president - a VP might say some stupid things, but it doesn't really do too much damage.

The new crop of candidates provide another lesson in superstupidity. They aren't exactly a bunch of brain surgeons either.

Congress-critters ain't stoopid, they're pretty smart. They understand what they need to do to get elected and stay in office. Unfortunately, that rarely means serving the best interests of the majority of the electorate... or even reading, let alone understanding, the legislature they put forward on behalf of their corporate sponsors.