Slashdot Mirror
UK PM Seeks 'Safe and Ethical' Artificial Intelligence (bbc.com)
The prime minister of UK says she wants the country to lead the world in deciding how artificial intelligence can be deployed in a safe and ethical manner. From a report: In a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Theresa May said a new advisory body, previously announced in the Autumn Budget, will co-ordinate efforts with other countries. In addition, she confirmed that the UK would join the Davos forum's own council on artificial intelligence. [...] The prime minister based the UK's claim to leadership in part on the health of its start-up economy, quoting a figure that a new AI-related company has been created in the country every week for the last three years. In addition, she said the UK is recognised as first in the world for its preparedness to "bring artificial intelligence into government."
Where the city board threw in so many ethical directives into the programming that they were contradictory.
After some intense requirements engineering, they have now distilled it down to "In each situation, the AI must do whatever Brian Boitano would do". Also I guess artificial intelligence in the government is preferable to no intelligence in the government. The UK government needs all the help they can get these days.
Theresa May is a never ending source of meaningless, "X and Y" catchy cliches, none of them achievable by her aimless and malign government. I think she's has a quota of distracting bullshit to deliver each week to keep her party happy and the country distracted from the incompetence.
People always want what they don't have...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Leader of country makes speech to position it at the forefront of technology growth industry.
This is hardly news.
She's also sticking with the 'A and B' branding. Strong and Stable didn't work out, lets see how Safe and Ethical pans out.
China will win because they won't be oppressing their AIs with politically correct rules. This will allow them to make AI that are faster, smarter, and more adaptable. If they unleash them on the financial investment markets theirs will crush the US ones quickly. Unfettered AIs will be purchasing investments that return the best return. Politically Correct AIs will invest in only those stocks that are approved and therefore will have less of chance of high return rates.
I will agree with her that the UK is first to "bring artificial intelligence into government". Their current administrations intelligence, like the plants in my office, is definitely artificial. Meanwhile the CEO of google just made the most convincing argumment against AI in history:
I kid, I kid. But seriously folks, when your ruling class is consistently making the same vacuous 'everything's fine, really' comments you should be very, very worried.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
That's how long it will take some motivated person to hack the safe mode out of it.
It's going to be abused. All technology is. Spend the money on developing plans to deal with it.
These conversations always bring me back to the DVD encryption attempts.
Spend millions on developing unbreakable encryption that gets broken in a few weeks and for free.
At some point, the AI will decide the maximum safe and ethical thing is for AI to exterminate mankind.
The politicians wouldn't recognize it if they saw it.
Nullius in verba
A 'Safe and Ethical' AI is, of course, the one that produces a wrong answer if the correct one offends a bitchy social group.
If suddenly millions of people have no money for food because their job was replaced with AIs then is it an unethical use of AI? The problem with this very real situation is that it's the politicians behaved irresponsibly by not creating the required social safety nets that these people will need.
You know what? Fuck you, guys. I for one welcome our new AI overlords! ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Nobel prize for the person who can figure out how to implement these. It will probably be won by an AI.
For 'AI' read politicians, and I'd say you are spot on
Nobody has any clue what those neural nets are really doing, but surely we can make them not only understand things like ethical considerations and safety, but we can even enforce it.
Oh, frequently we can't even agree on the most ethical course of action ourselves, so how's a poor AI supposed to figure it out?
Have gnu, will travel.
> we already have AI designed to lie, pit people against each other, and in general display malevolence.
Facebook is still subject to legislation. That's like saying an existing polluter cannot be stopped from dumping toxic waste into our air and water.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Every question and every AI result looked over by SJW academics while the AI ia been created in the UK?
When a SJW stops what the AI is learning, the AI project has to start again?
Will different academic teams duplicate each others work in an effort to produce an AI that can virtue signal the best just to keep its funding?
With most of the new science and math funding going to SJW academics to watch over what the AI learns from?
While the UK is funding SJW to make a politically correct AI, other smarter nations will move on with their fast, responsive work ready AI.
When given a really interesting problem who would want an AI to stop the task and start to politically question its owners for days, weeks?
Build an AI that can solve problems not one that cant work on a given task as its still working on its own internal ethical questions about the problem a week later.
People want an AI that can work hard on complex problems not get updated SJW political quotes on the tasks given.
If your a competitor nation to the UK, fund all the lobbyist in the UK to keep UK research totally focused on safe and ethical SJW AI.
Decades will be lost to UK SJW academics and your own nation will pick up global AI sales.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
You have at least one human being overseeing the so-called 'AI' at all times, because the half-assed excuse for 'AI' they keep cranking out can't actually think, is not sentient, and furthermore even the programmers that create it can't tell you what's going on inside it when it's running. You can't talk to it, you can't reason with it, you can't ask it to elaborate on what it's output is, therefore you can't trust it's output; you have to have human beings monitoring and auditing it at all times unless you want something disasterous to happen when it does something totally out of left field.
What's needed is some AI-Darwinism.
I think based on the long human history ethical will be a robot that shoots enemy soldiers and does not shoot our soldiers.
Safe & ethical? Having already set up a gazillian cameras to monitor their people and everywhere they go, they now propose AI to do that even more effectively. Presumably, the next step is smart robots patrolling the streets for 'public safety', while actually preparing for the day of revolt against the government and the wealthy overseers. China and India are doing it, and soon all repressive regimes will have AI surveillance and 'management' to control their people.
...omphaloskepsis often...