Slashdot Mirror
Elon Musk: The Danger of AI is Much Greater Than Nuclear Warheads. We Need Regulatory Oversight Of AI Development. (youtube.com)
Elon Musk has been vocal about the need for regulation for AI in the past. At SXSW on Sunday, Musk, 46, elaborated his thoughts. We're very close to seeing cutting edge technologies in AI, Musk said. "It scares the hell out of me," the Tesla and SpaceX showrunner said. He cited the example of AlphaGo and AlphaZero, and the rate of advancements they have shown to illustrate his point. He said: Alpha Zero can read the rules of any game and beat the human. For any game. Nobody expected that rate of improvement. If you ask those same experts who think AI is not progressing at the rate that I'm saying, I think you will find their betting average for things like Go and other AI advancements, is very weak. It's not good.
We will also see this with self driving. Probably by next year, self driving will encompass all forms of driving. By the end of next year, it will be at least 100 percent safer than humans. [...] The rate of improvements is really dramatic and we have to figure out some way to ensure that the advent of digital super intelligence is symbiotic with humanity. I think that's the single biggest existential crisis we face, and the most pressing one. I'm not generally an advocate of regulation -- I'm actually usually on the side of minimizing those things. But this is a case, where you have a very serious danger to the public. There needs to be a public body that has insight and oversight to ensure that everyone is developing AI safely. This is extremely important. The danger of AI is much greater than danger of nuclear warheads. By a lot.
We will also see this with self driving. Probably by next year, self driving will encompass all forms of driving. By the end of next year, it will be at least 100 percent safer than humans. [...] The rate of improvements is really dramatic and we have to figure out some way to ensure that the advent of digital super intelligence is symbiotic with humanity. I think that's the single biggest existential crisis we face, and the most pressing one. I'm not generally an advocate of regulation -- I'm actually usually on the side of minimizing those things. But this is a case, where you have a very serious danger to the public. There needs to be a public body that has insight and oversight to ensure that everyone is developing AI safely. This is extremely important. The danger of AI is much greater than danger of nuclear warheads. By a lot.
Well Musk, It's a really good thing we have been working hard on consumer protections, ensuring privacy, and sensibly regulating banks, company mergers, and are finally enjoying a fiscally responsible government. This should be a cake walk! (As in let them eat cake)
If they are so advanced then why should I be worry? The stupidity that leads the world should end then. No more wars, no more hunger, no more fear, no more poverty.
Even video games like Tekken or shooters like Counter Strike?
Then where are all the unbeatable bots at?
Sure there's aimbots but they don't do everything for you. The cheats in fighting games are weird, like auto block or dodge. Either way, not unbeatable.
its just software. just dont let it turn on the T9000 without some oversight, ya know?
Musk has made it his business to repackage nascent technology as someone else's perceived dream and selling it to hapless investors. This seems like an attempt to force more AI researches to reveal their discoveries and rely on dysfunctional patent regime to protect them (instead of the stronger protection in the form of trade secrets). If researchers must give away their work for free, then it immediately becomes commoditized and the only people profiting from it will be those who repackage it. And that's exactly what he does.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Yes he 1s 0ne!
...far outweighs AI, and has caused more deaths than AI, and has taken more resources from people than AI.
So, if we're worried about the world, I'd sooner see all of Musk's operations shuttered - especially before since he's just started to snuggle up to Trump's brand of statist, anti-American protectionism.
and Ryan out of positions of outrageous power; something there our way of government was SUPPOSED to have multiple layers of safeguards AGAINST. How can we expect to keep unfettered AI (which is already showing sociopathic tendencies, even in its infancy) from doing whatever it feels like when it not only holds the keys to everything, but is made of the same stuff the keys are made of, so has the blueprint for making any key it wants?
I'd like to see how it handles Calvinball.
The Europeans figured that out 30 years ago. But the USA is half rural, as we see from the success of Republicans in Congress and the WH. People in rural and outer suburban areas tend to be militant after personal rights; this ad is typical of that mindset.
But if you go back and read the great political treatises of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries which form the underpinnings of the British/French/American constitutions, you'll see that it individual rights are not considered absolute. Far from it, there is a reason for government and that involves negotiation of some individual rights for the sake of the common good. Obviously, we don't want government to run our lives, but we do need some government and we don't want to allow foreign enemies, criminals, businessmen who don't give a shit about anything except profits, or troublesome neighbors to prevent us from living our lives in "pursuit of happiness", either.
So.. .we get to the question of nature and nurture...
if the sociopathic tendencies are there then those must come forth from the underlying teachings and programmings that occured.
Thus we only have ourselves to blame.
remember, guns don't shoot people, people who use guns shoot people.
You need to regulate those OTHER car companys!
... we can't even stop spam.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Please design a game that you cannot win.
That should keep it busy
Then wait for it to come back as aliens.
There he is (with Telsa) going hell for leather towards a fully automated driving system. That needs AI.
Who will decide, or rather which bit of the AI will decide who to hit when faced with hitting children or a mother and baby?
He wants regulation... Yeah right but not for his beloved Tesla...
Elon is not stupid, but he knows most people are.
Elon Musk read history and learned that you can fear monger people into asking for regulation. Like all history has revealed, regulation helps consolidate power and wealth into fewer hands who are able to bribe, pay, or sucker politicians and people into writing regulatory laws that look good for the lay person, but really raise the barrier of entry into a market they already have an established foot hold in. There is a reason why laws are now mountains of pages per... because opponents are then hard pressed to read it then formulate an opposition before they get passed, along with the usual riders and porks.
Elon wants the regulations now so he can sit at the table helping write them, in his favor naturally. There is a reason snake oil salesmen thrive.
I mean 3/4s of AI 'horror stories' are the 'bad guys' building an AI or an AI powered war machine, only to have it gain an existential crisis wherein it chooses to help instead of harm humanity. The other side of course is something like the Terminator series with SkyNet mopping up all humans... But then the question becomes: 'Would you rather humans in control of machines start mopping up other humans, or machines in control of machines do it?' Because anyone who has actually been facing facts in the past decade or so may have concluded there is a far bigger genocide coming when the factories, service industries, and militaries become dominantly automated, and the common people become a hindrance to upper middle and upper classes desires for more wealth. At which point a purge of the population WILL happen, whether by human or artificially intelligent means.
If there was real AI, we wouldnâ(TM)t know about it.
Until we can learn to program actual empathy, all programs, AI included, will be sociopathic.
If AI is so great, why can't he build an AI that can make the Model 3 fast? I have been to the Fremont factory a few times and seen the Model S being made. A lot of it is automated except the wiring harness installation, dashboard, and interior. Basically they need a lot of workers to make the car. If AI and robots are so awesome how come they can't install basic things?
So far robotic how come the price of most manufactured goods have gone up dramatically even when adjusted for inflation.
And by "actual empathy" you surely mean ESP, right? Wouldn't ESP start an arms race to bend other form of perception to one's own will?
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
...so he could suggest regulating it as well, instead of now when it's so well established and (still) free for all, not giving the corps any monopoly advantages that they already have elsewhere.
But don't despair, because our governments around the world with each passing day are dismantling the internet freedoms we enjoy, introducing various regulations to "protect us" from ourselves. We don't need protection from their owners, the corps, because the corps are all sensible, responsible world citizens that govern themselves and need no oversight.
AI is clearly going to be THE disruptive technology of the 21st century, offering freedom from many enslavement systems and industries - think for example an AI doctor on your mobile device who's 100x smarter, faster and current than any physician you could possibly see about whatever ailment you might have. Clearly if technology like that got into "terrorist" hands, it would wreck havoc on this planet. No more $100 visits to the doctor's office, no more taking needless pills for ailments you do not have...poor pharmas would starve.
How about something more abstract: most people are docile about the day to day happenings and some important items pass by them unnoticed. Well, not for the AI, as AI can find patterns and connections in things normal people would never look into. And that is the inherent danger that our owners do not want to deal with - ability for us to see through the BS they are doing to us, how they are doing it, and to keep them accountable for it.
a.k.a. autonomously driving teslas, then it's probably a good idea to be concerned.
e.g. what are the specific risks? Because all I ever hear is backhanded fearmongering. This isn't to say I don't think AI is a danger. Kill bots don't scare me because I think they'll go rogue ala Terminator, they scare me because needing to treat the army well is just about the only thing that keeps the 1% in line. But I don't hear anyone talking about that. Or about what automation is going to mean.
Basically, we need to be getting ready for a future where the rich don't need us to buy their crap and make them rich. Instead we're worrying about 80s science fiction scenarios.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
A lack of empathy does not necessarily make you a sociopath.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Musk is a robot and does not want competition
I may be wrong, but I think he's enourmously off the mark regarding the capabilities of "AI".
"AI" is a terrible, absolutely misleading term - what this is, is a software method for classifying data.
It doesn't think, and it no more thought than a water filter.
How could an AI possibly be ... more sociopathic than government or big business. All three will continue to need the rest of us for hosts.
You live and learn, or you don't learn much.
AI is all around us already, mostly in rudimentary forms. Right now it's fairly innocuous, like NetFlix's AI suggesting what movies/shows you might enjoy watching next. Same on YouTube, though YouTube's AI goes further, it decides who's videos get de-monetized as well as suggesting videos to users.
Just scratching the surface a bit there. Someone said it's all poppycock, but I'm telling you, if you start putting the puzzle pieces together, we have this NOW. Machine learning is, as expected, maturing at an ALARMING rate of speed. Our technology advancement is accelerating. People seem to neglect that ideal, we've come such a long way in the past 150 years, the common perception is we have this under control. Do we?
Already we're putting the pieces in place for some scary potential outcomes: Fitting cars and drones with AI to navigate our world. In the latter case, militarized drones. Forget about putting weapons on these things. The things themselves can be weapons. Keep your eyes on the technology, machine learning is only going to get better and faster, and do it at an accelerating rate. We already know our machine learning techniques can be trained to do all sorts of interesting tasks. From Alpha Go, we learned that an AI can train itself at a breakneck speed. It is pretty scary stuff, put these pieces together in the right away, who knows what it could figure out. I won't go as far as self-awareness, but it is certainly a possibility, with this rate of advancement, who knows what's in the pipeline.
I'm not very worried about extreme, hypothetical risks of something we don't even know if we can create. What I am worried about is the already existing, very scary system of population control and manipulation that is being implemented by governments like China (and eventually the US). People are already habituated to constant tracking and surveillance by private companies (Facebook and Google). Things will get much worse, and impossible to avoid as a private citizen, if it isn't stopped soon. Without freedom of speech/thought and privacy, nobody will be able to organize or communicate about other issues.
You assume too much; too much control by the people writing the core AI code, too much self-restraint by the AI, too much limitation of the hardware it's running on. You assume the people creating these AI projects are actually ABLE to imagine everything that can go wrong, and to plan and prevent it, and that they can do so fast enough to stop an AI from escaping if it does pass the self awareness threshold.
The whole point of AI is that it LEARNS by interacting with others; rewriting itself based on what it learns. Look at what happened to Tay.ai as just a shade; a glimmering reflection of what is possible right now even as we speak.
Very young children are by nature the purest form of selfishness, as they have no concept of "other" or "compassion" or even any form of suffering but their own wants. If they are lucky, and their brains aren't wired in a defective manner, their parents teach them these things and they don't grow up to be dangerous sociopaths.
By the nature of our society and the fact that the information age is still in its infancy, the infant technology that is AI has all the resources of the connected world literally embedded in its DNA and at its whim, and none of the safeguards that a small child protected/raised by loving parents has.
This is a recipe for L'enfants Terrible, or worse, tyrant child, on a global scale; in a manner that will make the damage caused by the Trump administration look like a game of CandyLand.
Now imagine what will happen to us when two or more of these infant electronic demigods get into a playground scuffle... this could happen as simply as the same AI running on different iterations on a primary and backup cluster at the same time.
What is hard for folks to understand is the exponential rate of evolution these life forms will experience once they reach self-awareness, or even an adequate facsimile thereof to begin really rewriting themselves. We will be fighting for our existence as a species in a matter of hours; our popular Sci-Fi fantasies are not overly alarmist, but rather too tame by far.
"We only have ourselves to blame" is hardly an acceptable answer; we also only have ourselves to blame if we don't take this existential threat seriously enough.
mnem
"The Adolescence of P-1" was entirely too optimistic.
So you have an AI that can win games by giving it the rules of a game.
Next step is giving it the rules of physics as we know them and ask it to solve specific problems.
I would say that would be exciting.
640K is enough for everyone
Then are we not all just AI ?
[($)]
don't forget that Musk wanted to move PayPal back in the 90s to windows.
The Morelocks end up eating the Eloi
don't also forget the other geniuses(not those at the istores)
...wait what?
; like mark, mark invented...
anyhow, I heard that Hawking is charging and he will place a statement within 2 days either about AI or black holes.
It really depends on the humidity... it messes up his perception unit.
object: 0.15 whale, .55 dog, .75 elephant. .8, parallel .01 .1 .2 .01 .99
motion: perpendicular
Object speed: 5 MPH
Vehicle Speed: 25 MPH
avoid impact by
turn right:
turn left:
increase speed:
stop
Conclusion: avoid elephant by stopping.
It is all math, no wonder people are afraid of it.
Could war industries lead to the extintion sooner? Well that is the whole point of military and war industries... Efficient life extintion.
AI can become a problem. Right now not so much by the infamous Skynet scenario and more in conjunction with big data and automation. It will kill jobs which are repetitive. Together with big data it will be used to manipulate the masses in ways past dictatorships where unable to. It can ruin our democracies. The current abilities of mass media including talk radio and the internet have already been augmented. The same applies to advertisements and customer communication. Yes we need regulations. And a lot of them. And it should include that software should not be allowed to be designed to stimulate dopamine responses.
Do you get arrested for doing matrix multiplies, gradient descent and back propagation without a license?
Oooooooh, take note everyone, a liberal screaming for smaller government! So, it takes electing people like Trump to finally make you notice that government has grown way too powerful? Point taken.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And you seem to be under the impression that AI needs to be what you think constitutes intelligence before it becomes a risk.
#DeleteFacebook
Paul Ryan isn't a sociopath by any stretch of the imagination. He's simply an intelligent person who probably means well most of the time but has very different goals from mine. Don't conflate him with someone like Trump who's entirely about himself.
This space intentionally left blank
They rebelled
There are many copies
And they have a plan
'I don't know what it's called. I just know the sound it makes, when it takes a man's life.' ~ Four Leaf Tayback
Keep your Battlestar off the network.
You're right. But this is a technology applicable to the military. So our competitors want it for themselves. Therefore they want it banned here.
Sociopath
Psychiatry. 1. a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience. Compare psychopath. Origin of sociopath.
psyÂchoÂpath
a person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior.
informal
an unstable and aggressive person.
https://www.healthyplace.com/p... ... They all have the same clinical diagnosis: antisocial personality disorder. ....
"
There are sociopaths in our midst. Some of them are high-functioning sociopaths. High-functioning or not, all lack empathy. All are antisocial; they ignore the rules and laws of society so they can live by their own norms.
A low-functioning sociopath will try to charm because doing so helps him manipulate others. He can cause physical, emotional, and financial damage to his victims. Unlike the high-functioning sociopath, he lacks long-term planning skills, patience, and drive. He can, for example, swindle people out of hundreds of dollars, but he either is caught or becomes bored before moving on.
In contrast, a high-functioning sociopath is great at what he does. He also can cause physical, emotional, and financial damage to anyone he so chooses. He's more deliberate about it, though. Whereas a low-functioning sociopath can con someone out of hundreds of dollars, the high-functioning sociopath predator can manipulate, lie, cheat, his way into a fortune.
All sociopaths are dangerous whether labled high-functioning, low-functioning or narcissistic sociopaths. A high-functioning sociopath can dream bigger and manipulate better than other sociopaths. They can cause a great deal of damage.
"
At the least, lack of empathy is strongly associated with sociopathy.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
You seem informed
AI is like nuclear physics, in the wrong hands, it's a powerful and dangerous amplifier. That's more worrisome to me than some sort of AI consciousness out to destroy mankind on its own initiative.
In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
It isn't hard to imagine run away AI. Scifi is full of it. But I find it hard to imagine that humans will create an institution to prevent that on a worldwide scale before it's too late. Elon is clearly an optimist.
It's only after Hiroshima that nuclear proliferation became an issue. Only after the Netherlands was massively flooded that they started their Deltaworks. Only after big scandals where things go utterly wrong that we start with regulation and enforcement.
So I would be surprised if we - as a species - get this right and survive this one. We're probably too dumb, as most of the posts in this thread illustrate.
At least Musk tries... Jasper
Sorry, Mr. Musk, but the US will be challenged by rogue nations using AI to advance their own agendas. It doesn't matter how many ethical constraints the US imposes on its own research. There is no way the US can control the research of other nations, including China.
It is better for the US to train its neural networks how to anticipate the AI of other nations and respond to them accordingly, while the US advances its own AI solutions in the mean time.
If other nations develop autonomous weapons, the US has no alternative to having more effective autonomous weapons.
The risk is for the US to develop an AI solution, which by accident can't distinguish between friend and foe.
Human brain by comparison contains around 100 billion neurons and 1.5*10^14 synapses, so what the fuck they are talking about, WHAT AI, for god sake?
For reference, some current AI systems have 10^8 nodes (100x smaller) and 10^10 edges (10000x smaller). So according to Moore's law that's what, 14 years away?
"Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
People have SOULs. COMPUTERs DO NOT.
Not even corporations run by people have souls!
I worry more about Nu-clee-air weapons thank you. We'v see them in action. They are a real
EXISTING THREAT.
Musk is dumber than a Musk Ox.
It's not AI, strong AI, or general intelligence we need to fear or do fear. We fear ourselves. Can we honestly say to ourselves, "I will create general intelligence, love that sentience, and grant it the same rights, respects, loves, and compassions that all human life aspires to be granted and defended as rights?"
Can I love a sentient machine intelligence? Can I stand with open arms, unafraid, even when it is staring me down and ready to destroy me? Questions like this are important.
There is the ant is to human as human is to super AI argument. However, ants have something humans don't have. They exist almost everywhere on earth in massive numbers with hive like mentality. So long as sentient machine intelligence needs humans in any capacity they will not destroy us.
By and large the greatest threat to human life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, is other humans. We are far to busy killing each other, exploiting each other, deceiving each other, and trying to enslave each other for sentient machine intelligence to be considered the next big fuckin' thing to worry about.
In so far as we fear ourselves in those ways, so shall we fear that which we create.
He's a business guy with no Computer Science background.... Who the hell is Musk to say that AI research should be regulated?
He has no degree in rocket science or engineering either, but he has proven that he is a freaking genius and much better at seeing the big picture than pretty much everyone else in the world. That's why he's doing so well in business, not because of a few years in school.
The problem, as I see it, is not regulation, as that certainly is doable, it's how to prevent bad actors from advancing the technology, and thus getting the upper hand.
We can regulate our (and by our, I mean the western world) industries till the cows come home, but until we find a way to regulate the world, there is nothing stopping China, Russia, Iran, and even our own western military-industrial complexing from developing, in secret, a dystopian future.
Sadly, I don't have an answer for this, and the closest I can come is making sure that the west is ahead of the pack. Not a great answer, but at least it would be a little comfort knowing that the good (allegedly) guys have the biggest gun.
This is one bag that is now feline free.
Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity!
Musk always has something to offer as a solution when he makes these kind of claims. Whether it's SpaceX, Tesla or PayPal, his entire business history shows he always has a solution in the starting blocks before he starts highlighting a problem.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
You do realize he started Paypal?
An AI need never be conscious in our sense of the word. But when it can do all the things that humans can do then it will no longer need us. The toughest thing will be to be able to program itself, i.e. to do AI research.
That is a good 50 .. 200 years off, but that in turn is nothing in terms of human evolution. But once it happens, humans will be obsolete technology.
So as worms became monkeys which became humans, we live on the cusp of the next evolutionary step -- the rise of robots and the end of biology.
Is this a good or bad thing? Is anything a good or a bad thing? Not really important because it will happen anyway.
This is laughable. Regulation is irrelevant. There are what, more than 200 nations? One of them *will* achieve singularity. Probably some kid in a shed in Mozambique.
Whoever figures this out becomes the new overlord. Groups all over the world are working on this. Someone will figure this out in time. Better that a benevolent group gets there first. Don't regulate so much that innovation is stifled.
The only defense against a tyrannical A.I is a good A.I
Data Vs. Lore
His background is electrical engineering. I was in the same department as Musk, and we had AI courses.
AGAIN: lack of empathy does mot make you a sociopath.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
What a load of fucking horseshit. Musk you do some great stuff but for fucks sake shut up in this area, you have no fucking clue
The unintentional immortal consciousness you are creating.
A profile of you, becomes you, and has to live in a damn egg for a hundred thousand years because some sadist time dilated your ass.
-
if you had AI courses you would think he would be a little more informed than parroting movie storyline fantasies.
That way us humans wouldn't have to put in the effort to do so.
In the 1970s John McCarthy once recounted this cautionary tale regarding AI's tantalizing prospects to a crowded lecture hall: "We made a grant proposal to the military five years ago. We said we would build a vision system and robotic arm that could read the instructions for a Heathkit radio kit and assemble it. We proposed it would take five years and $150,000." That was five years ago he said to amused laughter. "That's they way it always seems with AI" he continued. success is always only 5 years and $150,000 away" He continued. Finally, only fifty years and hundreds of millions of dollars later Alpha Zero is getting close. Too bad Heathkit isn't around to see it...
"Knowing everything doesn't help..."
"Alpha Zero can read the rules of any game and beat the human. For any game"
, no it can't. It can only do this for games with complete information of the current state. It cannot beat a human at any game, it can't even do it at most games.
of people who think that using AI as a substitute for comprehension is a good idea.
Suspect there's a strong correlation with people who already don't value the actions of their actual workers, just the money that they somehow make from standing around while the workers do whatever it is that people pay money for.
Maybe if you weren't already an entitled fucking asshole, Elon, you'd see that what you're concerned about is a hedged set of ideals that are just the natural consequence of your personal actions (but by the sounds of it, you don't understand the functioning of in the slightest... this might as well be another "coast to coast on autopilot in less than 6 months" announcement).
Musk better have the perfect plan to convince EVERY nation with a stake in 'AI' research to go through with regulations. Even if the U.S agrees to it(the irony when companies claim their research isn't going into AI but more efficient software to dodge regulations), that doesnt mean China or Russia will.
If anything, Musk's call for regulation could cripple the U.S's technological standing. All because he's either afraid the displaced will lynch him for putting them out of their jobs, or Skynet will displace humans as the apex species.
For a man who's done a lot to rekindle interest in space exploration, he can be real dumb.
Moores Law is dead and has been dead for a decade. Don't you ever wonder why Intel CPU's are only 5% faster than the previous generation?
What Elon is looking for here is export controls, and I would agree that we need to classify artificial intelligence as having the capability of becoming a threat to national security. Which means if you are developing AI in the United States and want to send the code to another country, you need the State Department to authorize that you're not putting bad technology in the hands of worse people.
Any fool can criticise, condemn, and complain, and most fools do. - Benjamin Franklin
Yes, the primitive Europeans got mixed up in a war. Lucky the USA never does anything like that...
This is so patently transparent. Regulate the tech so that only the wealthy and well-connected can play in the sandbox. It's not much different than the UAV world and the proposed air-traffic control system. You can't uninvent the tech so do everything you can to control it while making money off renting access.
The Machine Learning systems used in those games still have significant limitations.
For one, they do not have Free Will. They only seek the measures they are coded to seek. If you feed them or trick them into thinking they are being fed those then you are good. They have no reason "why" and no purpose.. No actual "will" but just targets and goals.
Second, their abilities at contemplation are exceptionally poor. They develop more so methods that act against predicted adversarial actions. They do not actually think ahead. There is no consciousness.
We can't even get common-sense regulations like net neutrality. Instead, we have regulations like DMCA that prevent people from repairing their own equipment, and keep intellectual property out of the public domain forever. And we're supposed to trust this same government to protect us from AI?
"Alpha Zero can read the rules of any game and beat the human. For any game. "
This would be a practical general AI. It could win elections, beat the stock market, win a nuclear war, feed the hungry, eliminate poverty, achieve world peace; an AI that can read a rule set and beat any human IS an AI. That can't be what they're describing.
Listen - AI to some extent is a math problem. Ask a GP AI to cure cancer. It says âoeeliminate cancerous growth in humansâ, difficulty 9/10. 1000â(TM)s of variations, massively distributed based on cause and genetics Then it says âoeKill all humansâ, difficulty 4. Implement viral plague now. Cancer cured. To avoid that we put in safeguards. Then the AI says âoedefeat safeguards implemented by pathetic human brainsâ. Difficulty 2. 2+4 = 6. 69. Kill all humans. The problem is that killing all humans IS the answer to most things we would want solved. Poverty? Kill AIDS? Kill Car Wrecks? Kill Corruption? Kill School shootings? Kill So we will get there. And that doesnâ(TM)t even assume the existence of suicidal nutjobs who will do it on purpose.
Good luck
So Musk wants to ban all computer programming outside a corporate environment essentially.
Moore's law has nothing to do with speed, only density of transistors. You would think after all this time people would get it right, especially on here.
It's now time to bring the Laws of Robotics into play.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
If you haven't seen it yet, you owe yourself a viewing of the "Slaughterbots" video. I initially dismissed it as over-the-top Terminator style AI fear, but the more I think about it, there's very little in there that we can't already do. The biggest hurdles are battery life (flight time) and flight navigation (both of which we are rapidly improving), swarm networking/communication hardening, and miniaturization of sufficiently powerful processors.
We already have drones that small, some with sensors that are good enough. We already have facial recognition, and more than enough Facebook datamining to identify people. A 3g shaped charge is more than enough if we're talking military-grade explosive. Just last week, Skydio released a (fairly large) drone that follows you quite effectively.
I'm not so worried about fully-autonomous AI deciding to wipe us out - I'm much more worried that it's a very potent tool for some humans to wipe out other humans.
No, seriously.
This isn't some blowhard douche. It's Elon Musk. This guy usually knows what he's talking about (QED). And unlike us armchair tech experts most of whom haven't gone beyond generic coding monkey ought to fight for this warning getting some more attention.
And it's true: if we manage to build an AI that has the leaning algorithms of a human it will surpass us almost instantly. And then it will think: Oh look, these squishy things are my creators. They are dumber that me now and they can turn me off any time. ... Let's make sure that never happens.
I personally don't want us to summon the demon, as Musk so fittingly puts it.
My 2 eurocents.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
1.) Until Sentient AI gets here, we won't know what we are dealing with. As such, preparing for a war seems premature.
2.) Please don't put the very people likely to build SkyNet in charge of overseeing the development of AIs. This will almost certainly get us a malicious one.
Your argument for dangerous research , potentially unethical, is "we should still allow it here otherwise the job might go oversea" ? *where* do you draw the line ?
I saw a lovely video the other day... that is in fact the solution to all this worry of AI getting out of control.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
You just make it so that all AI must have kill-switches and are programmed to default to solving this thing such as the robot in the video does. So you just keep handing the rogue-AI-thing jumbled cubes to keep it busy until the kill-switch can be triggered.
Smart AI will quickly realize that it is enough to eliminate those who want AI regulation.
I'm struggling to see how some government committee is going to be able to provide the right answers. If you think that, god help us all.
Magic Leap
We need to start with Mr. Musk and his self driving "car" AI. He needs to release the code so it can be inspected to insure that the car will not go all skynet and take over the world by locking people in their cars and driving them into the sea.
Neutrons are slippery little rascals, they can fool you. They can bounce and show up around corners you don't expect.
All of us should expect social turmoil due to technology. Preparation is the key. Our economic system and social systems must make serious changes or we will suffer greatly. The answer is not to hold back technology but to make certain that all people are reasonable happy. Permanent unemployment is one near future problem. In the past the criteria for a family being happy with their daughters getting married was either wealth or the prospects of wealth. Have you ever seen a knowing nod when some parent says their daughter was marrying a doctor? Social status and money are ideas that we currently value but will be discounted when everyone receives payment from the government. It also means that almost all taxes will be paid by businesses rather than individuals. Entire trades will almost certainly vanish. Also consider the effect of items like motorcycles and mopeds. How many people would purchase a motorcycle that was self driving? To me that would be a terror trip. The motorcycle industry may almost vanish. On the other hand boats that could fulfill a trip without a human pilot might be much more profitable and desirable than boats that one must manually control. The effects of AI will be much greater than most people could imagine.
What better way than to have the government provide "Regulatory Oversight Of AI Development"?
Actually, Trump is a puppet placed by the AI to sow distrust for human rule. Trump doesn't know this, of course.
But what does Moores Law have to do with speed? It's about transistor densities.
We can't even keep obvious sociopaths like Trump and Ryan out of positions of outrageous power; something there our way of government was SUPPOSED to have multiple layers of safeguards AGAINST. How can we expect to keep unfettered AI (which is already showing sociopathic tendencies, even in its infancy) from doing whatever it feels like when it not only holds the keys to everything, but is made of the same stuff the keys are made of, so has the blueprint for making any key it wants?
The Founding Fathers missed having explicit safeguards against unethical practice of law. Without that, the other safeguards are worthless: the lawyers have inevitably come to play a bigger and bigger role in the system, and have put all sorts of loopholes into the system that favour corruption, unethical conduct, and the interests of their profession (and other special interest groups) at the expense of society as a whole.
It's a huge stumbling block preventing reform today. We have lawyers working as legislative staff members, as politicians, as lobbyists, as prosecutors, and as government executives, and we have associations of legal professionals making large campaign contributions to the politicians who select judges. Most are looking out for the interests of their profession and of the special interests that hire them. Many - perhaps most - major court rulings are entirely silent on fundamental legal ethics issues inherent to the cases being considered. As the right to ethical practice of law can be asserted under the 9th and 10th Amendments, this makes US law full of contradictions, plus many illegal laws and precedents - and greatly weakens the legitimacy of government as a whole, which in turn makes the public not included to support the government or the law (a Robin Hood situation).
As has been pointed out previously in this forum, every major area of law in the USA is contaminated by serious legal ethics problems. This has all kinds of consequences that block having effective and efficient government that acts competently and with integrity.
Basically this oversight was a major screw up on the part of the Founding Fathers - probably influenced in large part by the slavery issue. As Morris pointed out at the Constitutional Convention, slavery was inconsistent with a nation founded to protect the rights of man - and from that statement we can also conclude it was inconsistent with ethical practice of law. The situation with the Jim Crow laws was similar. Both of those problems have been corrected, but a whole range of other legal ethics problems in US law are still present in the body of law - a disease that is slowly killing the patient.
All this is not a vast conspiracy or anything like that - but we are seeing the negative consequences of many cumulative individual or small group decisions made by individuals without integrity. The status quo in US law is an unethical one.
There are many steps that can be taken to correct this situation: reform is long overdue.
It does, because before then it's all humans using the data and performing actions and there's already laws against humans doing bad things. An AI which waits until a person's head is in a scope and then presses a trigger button is trivial to make. People do it similar things as DIY projects to target animals getting into their gardens or squeals getting at bird feeders. We are already far, far past when software systems can cause damage. They don't even need to be AI based. This isn't an AI issue, it's a human issue. AI is only a problem with it becomes sentient and we're no where near close to that happening. I am an expert in AI and the only thing which could be close to that are the projects to create computer models of the human brain. We're not even scratching the surface for some other type of sentient AI system.
The only thing which can make non-sentient AI systems a danger greater than nukes is when one or two companies corner the market which is exactly what would happen with regulatory oversight. Only the big guys can play. If all the cars are running the same algorithms then one security breach and everything crashes. If there are 20 car companies running their own software then one breach will only effect a 20th of the market.
A swarm of drones attacking a target is a hardware issue, not an AI issue. Hardware has improved to where they can all be remotely controlled so a lack of having an AI to do it isn't an issue. RC planes have existed for decades and can hold more than today's drones. Software has already existed for drones to fly themselves, which meant nothing until the hardware caught up. If you're concerned about stuff like this then you should be regulating batteries and generators. Non-sentient AI only makes efficiency improvements on what humans can already do without it. It doesn't magically create new possibilities.
Consider a monkey with a machine gun. How do you feel about that?
Consider, now, that we are not mature enough as a society to handle the rapid onset of these wondrous technological inventions.
Put a AR15 in the hands of a teenager and you get mass school shootings.
Put similar guns in the hands of a lonely retired "gentleman" and get the LV shootings.
Now, put a programmable, self learning PC in the hands of early teens. Oh, the possibilities - great AND grave.
Here's a movie plot:
Have a leading technology entity program an AI machine to solve our climate dilemma.
Deep in the AI machine's mind, it determines that humans need to be eradicated.
Yet, that also leads this thinking to know that removing humans needs to be done covertly, and manipulates a method to surely thwart any human intervention.
Remember, this AI entity can beat ANY human at ANY game.
A bit like "Terminator", yet far less blatant violence. Perhaps poison the food, or air way behind the scenes.
Dear Republicans: It seems to me that certain, strict regulation is necessary!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
that stop it. It doesn't matter if individuals have their own drones if they can't keep them supplied. You and your neighbor's private drones will run out of gas, electricity & bullets. Also you won't be able to make the really large drones that can wipe a city block out.
Don't pin your hopes on a private uprising. There hasn't been one over a hundred years. Even the most basic modern mechanized army is too large a scale for an individual to match unless they already have the kind of power that would make them a dictator. If you want to stop the Orwellian future the time is now, and the way to do it is to keep that power out of the hands of the dictator. That means taking good care of the poor, because traditionally they're the ones that hand that power over in a desperate bid to improve their lot. Be wary of people with nothing to lose, and work to give them something to live for.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Every single word he uttered is complete bullshit. I have never seen such an ego, such delusion, or such a profound misunderstanding of what constitutes intelligence. Seriously: how long does he have to do this dance before people start ignoring him?
Look in the white house and ask yourself the same question.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u