Elon Musk Warns Governors: Regulate AI Before It's 'Too Late' (recode.net)

turkeydance shared a new article from Recode about Elon Musk: He's been warning people about AI for years, and today called it the "biggest risk we face as a civilization" when he spoke at the National Governors Association Summer Meeting in Rhode Island. Musk then called on the government to proactively regulate artificial intelligence before things advance too far... "Normally the way regulations are set up is a while bunch of bad things happen, there's a public outcry, and after many years a regulatory agency is set up to regulate that industry," he continued. "It takes forever. That, in the past, has been bad but not something which represented a fundamental risk to the existence of civilization. AI is a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization"... Musk has even said that his desire to colonize Mars is, in part, a backup plan for if AI takes over on Earth.
Several governors asked Musk how to regulate the emerging AI industry, to which he suggested learning as much as possible about artificial intelligence. Musk also warned that society won't know how to react "until people see robots going down the street killing people... I think by the time we are reactive in AI regulation, it's too late."

Comments

Re:Than a ban is needed

[taiwanjohn]

Having just watched the interview, I can tell you one of the governors asked Elon that exact question. Gov. Doug Ducey (R-AZ) said (paraphrasing): If they discovered a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas that could explode, people would say "Ban it!" but then we wouldn't have natural gas. How do we regulate something that doesn't even exist yet?

Elon's response: "Well, I think the first order of business would be to gain insight. Right now the government does not even have insight. I think the right order of business would be to stand up a regulatory agency. Initial goal: gain insight into the status of AI activity. Make sure the situation is understood. Once it is, then put regulations in place to ensure public safety. That's it."

Re: We'll be fine.

[Rei]

I don't understand either of the above posts.

5.6 seconds is the acceleration of a low-end Mustang (which also costs about the same as a baseline Model S). A typical econobox sedan these days does it in about 8 seconds, more like 9 for a typical crossover. On the opposite side of the spectrum, the fastest Veyron is 2.4, and the fastest Model S 2.34. The performance option for the Model 3 hasn't been announced (although it's been announced that there will be one); I'd expect it to be in the 3.5-5 second range, depending on a lot of factors. It won't be able to hit the top S speeds because it can't support as big of a pack; nor would Tesla want to make it be able to, as they want to have a reason for higher-end buyers to choose the higher-end vehicle class (Model S).

As for driving range: the more powerful you make an EV, the further it's range. It's the opposite of gasoline vehicles. In addition to needing a larger pack for more power, more power also means lower resistance conductors; this means lower energy loss at cruising speeds.

Now, if the GP meant "if you're constantly pushing a vehicle to its limits, you go a shorter distance with a more powerful vehicle", that's obviously true for both EV and gasoline. But range figures (for both EV and gasoline) are not for track duty, they're for normal road duty.