Slashdot Mirror


Hawking: AI Could Be 'Worst Event in the History of Our Civilization' (usatoday.com)

An anonymous reader shares a USA Today report: Elon Musk isn't the only high-profile figure concerned about the rise of artificial intelligence. Scientist Stephen Hawking warned AI could serve as the "worst event in the history of our civilization" unless humanity is prepared for its possible risks. Hawking made the remarks during the opening night of the Web Summit in Lisbon, Portugal. Hawking expects AI to transform every part of our lives, with the potential to undo damage done to the Earth and cure diseases. However, Hawking said AI could also spur the creation of powerful autonomous weapons of terror that could be used as a tool "by the few to oppress the many." "Success in creating effective AI could be the biggest event in the history of our civilization, or the worst," he said. Hawking called for more research in AI on how to best use the technology, as well as implored scientists to think about AI's impact. "Perhaps we should all stop for a moment and focus our thinking on not only making AI more capable and successful, but maximizing its societal benefit," he said.

11 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. The real danger of so-called 'AI': by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real danger from what we're erroneously calling 'AI' right now, is that it's a dead-end approach that will never reach the potential we want it to. It will always fall short because it's not real Artificial Intelligence, not any more than a vegan cheeseburger is a real cheeseburger; it's imitation AI, ersatz, not the real thing at all. None of what is being produced right now can actually think, 'learning algorithms' and 'expert systems' are not true minds, your dog is smarter and more capable of actual cognition than even the best of these machines are. So what will happen is too much trust will be put into them for critical and/or dangerous things, and they will inevitably screw up in spectacular and disasterous ways -- because they cannot think. In order to have true, real AI, we need to understand how an actual brain accomplishes the things it does -- and we're nowhere near understanding that. Maybe in a hundred years, maybe never. In the meantime these over-hyped half-baked excuses for 'AI' need to not be put in charge of anything that could cause disasters or loss of human life.

    1. Re:The real danger of so-called 'AI': by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      THIS is finally an insightful post. He is right: the current approach is a dead end and Moores Law ending will kill it even faster.

  2. Re:Fear mongering by Dutchmaan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AI is improving every day, it far exceeds human capabiltiy at recognizing patterns and responding to them. When you watch what's happening with video games and how AI is beginning to trounce even the best players you can see how even in it's infancy AI needs to be treated with the same caution as you would a dangerous virus. Once the genie is out of the bottle it will be too late to discuss it.

  3. Re:He wishes... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Oppenheimer, Gates and company should have gotten the Nobel peace prize.

    Longest period of relative peace in human history.

    That said: Hawking has crossed the Shockley/Chomsky line. He is now talking out of his ass about things he knows nothing about.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  4. AI doesn't exist yet, and may NEVER exist by realmolo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Everything that is labeled "AI"...isn't.

    We don't have computers that can think yet. We just don't. We aren't even CLOSE, and it may not be possible at all.

    Hawking doesn't know what he's talking about. Neither does the media.

    1. Re:AI doesn't exist yet, and may NEVER exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hawking doesn't know what he's talking about. Neither does the media.

      Problem is that an AI program doesn't have to qualify for your definition of AI to be incredibly powerful and dangerous.

    2. Re:AI doesn't exist yet, and may NEVER exist by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Everything that is labeled "AI"...isn't.

      We don't have computers that can think yet. We just don't. We aren't even CLOSE, and it may not be possible at all.

      Hawking doesn't know what he's talking about. Neither does the media.

      Alternately, we might be less than 10 years away. We don't really know how far off we are or what the dangers are because we don't know what a strong general AI will really look like.

      Talking about the dangers of string AI now is a bit like talking about super-weapons in 1920. Sure they saw how science + warfare could increase destructiveness, but there's no more reason they should have anticipated Nukes in 20-30 years in 1920 than 1820.

      --
      I stole this Sig
  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Re:Fear mongering by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With the speed of computers, I'm afraid it will be too late before we even realize the genie is out of the bottle.

    There doesn't even need to be a malevolent AI to take over humanity. It could be a benevolent takeover that is prompted by people.

    Forget science fiction movies and books; there doesn't need to be a revolution where an AI is more intelligent than us and we realize too late. It could happen slowly step by step.

    To be effective in the stock market now you have to have certain computer led decisions. That might not be true AI yet, but a computer can respond to news faster than a human. All the major traders use computer made decisions now. So, there is one industry where computers are already prominent. What if it happens in other industries over time (it is... and we're gladly and willingly turning over control).

    What if we decide computers, or AI can control the economy better than a human. If one country does it and it proves to be successful, others will have to do it to keep up. What if AI can handle trials better than a jury. What if AI can produce better military strategies.

    There doesn't have to be an revolution; AI will evolve to take over humanity with us willingly handing it the reigns. Probably won't happen in our lifetime, but the slow transfer of power has already begun. Right now humans can override computer decisions, but that will eventually disappear when AI is less flawed than people and we realize a human overriding it is usually wrong.

    AI will one day rule and control humanity- and we WILL give it that power over us willingly.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  7. Re:Fear mongering by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not xkcd, but it seems obligatory.

  8. Stick with your area of expertise by mopower70 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I remember reading Roger Penrose's "The Emperor's New Mind" when I was in grad school. He's a brilliant mathematician and I was excited to read his take on the field I had spent the last two years studying. I was blown away when I realized the gist of his book was that computers could never develop consciousness because of quantum randomness that occurs in the cells of the human brain. In other words, he follows the millennium old and thoroughly debunked myth that consciousness arises from "brain stuff". I couldn't understand how someone so smart could have devoted so much time to a subject yet be so ludicrously wrong. I realized shortly thereafter that the great minds are usually great in their areas of expertise, but are often just as looney as your drunk Uncle Bob in those that aren't. In other words, don't take relationship advice from Albert Einstein, and don't listen to warnings on the future of AI from a cosmologist no matter how smart he is.