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.
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?
Repackaged self landing Rockets for spacecraft... Ooook
[($)]
That's true, and Musk is full of crap on the timeline here too. Nothing we have today should even qualify as weak AI as neural nets are currently just a fancy way to optimize generic types of systems for a particular parameter or two. The danger Musk speaks of is mature, cheap, and robust weak AI coupled with strong AI. Realistically speaking, unless several major unexpected breakthroughs happen, this is at least 50 years away. It is comming though, possibly some of the younger readers here could be affected if they are lucky (or unlucky as it may be)
... we can't even stop spam.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
(singing) Daisy, Daisy....
I'm sorry, Dave....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Pretty far off the mark... One thing very easy for Musk, especially given his nerd fanbase, is the ease at which he can hire the absolute best for any given task. If he were to announce tomorrow he'd like to get into blenders, 1000 applicants in the blender industry would salivate at the prospect of jumping ship. Very likely between Tesla and OpenAI, he already has the best AI researchers. Note I'm not saying whether or not any of this AI fear is founded, just that your argument of him doing this to get sneak peaks at others' work is a bit ridiculous.
Until we can learn to program actual empathy, all programs, AI included, will be sociopathic.
He wants regs? OK...car computer software must be developed to FAA standards.
What? That puts him out of business? Too bad.
When his cars fail to autodrive next year, can we ignore him?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Can you and your friend do something as simple as make a can of coke? Indistinguishable from the real Coke?
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
I don't think anyone is beating Microsoft in AI. They are just not exposing their tech on client side. They are keeping it on server side and only letting customers use it on per-client request basis.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
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.
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.
You're currently moderated as "interesting", but it looks like you've also attracted the trolls so it probably won't last. Not sure what sense of "interesting" the original moderators intended.
Usually I don't even bother with a check for "interesting" these years, but your comment came up as the only mention of "profit". I think that term is at the kernel of the deadly threat posed by AI, but 95% of the current comments disagree. Actually 100% since your comment was actually part of an ad hominem attack on Musk. (If I must, I guess I'd say that his recent support of #PresidentTweety did reduce my estimate of his intelligence--but I've always regarded him as mostly lucky, especially in his timing. Pretty much any way you slice it, agreeing with #FatNixon is just another form of feeding a troll... But I'm being drawn off topic again.)
The AIs are only dangerous if they have evil programming. It doesn't get more evil that being programmed for the single objective of profit maximization, though I admit my perspective is biased. I'm a human being and I know that my own profitability is limited. My conclusion is that a profit-first AI is going to eliminate the inefficient humans ASAP.
From that perspective, self-driving cars are just one of the key technologies towards eliminating the need for human beings to move the robots around. I'm not going to panic when I see the self-driving drones. It's the self-driving tanks that bother me. Anyone else remember Laumer and the Dinochrome Brigade?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
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.
The trolls are the only good thing left on /.
Not the OP, the funny trolls. Read at -1
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yes. He himself have stated that the idea of and work on self-landing rockets aren't a new thing (IIRC when commenting a Blue Origin patent). Repackaged - and not obviously useful.
Why not obviously useful? Reuse requires resilient components, that means heavier components. Some potential faults are hard to detect which may require expensive verification of components before reuse. Some components may be reusable but others not which would mean disassembly/reassembly. Even with verification of parts some may be less reliable when reused. Reconditioning of parts also add costs.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
He has access to very very cheap money too, people are willing to violently throw it at him with just the hint of a promise of some publicity.
When you have that much cash its not hard to suggest some wild things but reality has a way of bringing many of those things back down to something reasonable. Such as the boring company/hyper loop, which will have continually narrowing goalposts as time goes on, the technical hurdles to achieve the promise are still not within the grasp of even that much money if ROI was even a laughable consideration.
If the he doesn't go bankrupt for other reasons, EM will encounter serious challenges when some big 'unexpected' failure causes some deaths on some scale even small.
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.
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
puts("You lost.");
return 0;
}
Total processing time: .0002 us.
Ready for next task. _
-AI
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
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.
I don't think anyone is beating Microsoft in AI. They are just not exposing their tech on client side. They are keeping it on server side and only letting customers use it on per-client request basis.
You mean just like Google does? That's not how AI works in practice anyway.
The algorithms are mostly the algorithms. Often tweeking them reduces their performance (hell tweeking their hyperparameters often reduces their performance too). Applied AI (solving a specific problem with AI) is usually about feature extraction and then just trying different algorithms until you find one that works well enough or better than the rest. Some algorithms (NN) have a network topology and often people spend large amounts of time/computation trying different graphs. Often this process is about access to large amounts of computing hardware, access (and use of) high performance analysis systems for streaming data to the algorithms and efficient implementations of those algorithms (Random Forest, Gradient Boosted Machines, etc). Most of these things have nothing to do with AI research (inventing new algorithms).
The point is that none of the examples Musk mentioned involve new algorithms (truly effective novel algorithms are quite rare). And the companies that Musk mentions are downright terrible at all the things around an AI system that are mostly about efficient I/O and computation (BigQuery is the worst performing analytics engine ever created). So any fear of those technologies is probably poorly founded. Either Musk doesn't understand this area (likely) or he has some other reason to propose this (also likely). I'm betting on the latter.
"Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
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
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."
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
Microsoft AI has mostly been a joke so far. They want people to use their cloud platform, though.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
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.
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.
-
When space flight is much cheaper, as provided by reusable rockets, it makes more sense to put small, cheap satellites etc into orbit.
When both your rocket and your payload are "cheap", it's less of a big deal when they get destroyed.
For businesses that have expensive satellites to put up, they can pay a premium to use a brand-new never-used-before rocket. For other run of the mill launches, they can re-use the rockets without doing all of the expensive verification and re-conditioning you talk about, which are things that only drive the prices up.
In other words, when things are cheap and frequent, failure is less important. When failure is less of a problem, it means you can use systems to make it cheaper and more frequent. It's a virtuous circle, so long as failure rates are acceptable.
There's an absolutely massive difference in the cost required to engineer something that has 0.0001% chance of failure, vs a system with 1% chance of failure. If the market doesn't like the 1% chance of failure, they won't buy the service.
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.
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
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?
It is all math, no wonder people are afraid of it.
Best comment today!
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Actually, it is what they're describing. "Beat the stock market" is already happening... see the book Flash Boys, among others, for what AI trading is doing. The problem with "win elections" is that it is hard to supply access to all the levers of the game at this time. Some of the others that you mention are still on the outside, but we are steadily approaching that point, and much faster than anyone thought. The problem is that they will likely be competing with other AIs who have contradictory goals. And that's why something like "world peace" is unsolvable -- not everyone is playing the same game.
Yes, when space flight is much cheaper.
It's not yet determined that 'reusable rockets' will make that happen.
Remember, the whole plan for the space shuttles involved them being cheap to reuse. They turned out to be extremely expensive to rework and use over and over again.
Evil profit-seeking was abandoned in Cambodia, as you will remember from your history of communism class.
The 'holocaust' in Cambodia was to a significant degree caused by the US bombing program. The US Military 'bombed' Cambodia heavily, while providing aid to civilians in Phnom Penh, the major city. This caused the near entire formerly-rural population of Cambodia to crowd into the city.
After the US withdrew from Cambodia, the entire population which was cut off from the food and resources the US was shipping into the city.
Mother Teresa could have been the one in charge, instead of Pol Pot, and about the same scenario would have happened. Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge were fanatical Stalinists, granted, but the only way to save that country at that time was to get the people back out into the countryside growing food, which is what they tried (in their Stalinist fashion) to do.
So Musk wants to ban all computer programming outside a corporate environment essentially.
You mean just like Google does?
They are protecting it in a simliar manner. Just because it's the same door, doesn't mean that what you acces behind those doors is the same every time. It's a service. But the only company which has any chance of making progress on it is Microsoft. I don't know if they will, btw. But no one else will for sure.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Lol. I hope you are kidding. If you think this is is convincing. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. This is true both on the downside and on the upside, btw.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Yeah. ok.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
AI front is not a technical field. It's a scientific field. And arstechnica kids are way out of their depth.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Google has become Sony 2.0. All they can do now is put shinies on their past achievements. They have no leadership. They have lost direction. They can't break new ground or make any steps forward. They are stuck at best. And, in certain areas, they are beginning to show cracks in reliability of fundamentals. The smartest people I have met in my life who worked at Google have left within the past year. Singularity will not be developed by the man who prophesized it.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
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.
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
Bingo
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Honestly, I can't even tell if you are arguing for or against AC's point. You do claim that the situation was "caused" by the US. But even if what you say were to be taken at face value, it would just mean that the US created those circumstances. Sort of like WWI created the circustances in which the Communist Revolution in Russia happened. But you can't lay the blame for Stalin's actions at the feet of WWI participants. In much the same way, you can't blame the participants of a war in Cambodia/Vietnam for the Stalinist methods used by Pol Pot. It is his methods that created the genocide. But you seem you to agree with that. And the GP seems to have argued that it was these methods that are to blame for the genocide. Well, blaming history which led you to the situation for your inability to handle a situation when a workable solution is available... that's the classic "find someone to blame"-type of argument.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
> Bigquery is the worst analytics engine ever? it supports incredible data load scale and query volume greater than any other analytics i'm aware of. billions of records a second can be loaded. you are wrong if you think google doesn't know how to be large scale data processing pipelines. they might not be faster in some limited issue, like say latency, but in throughput they are awesome.
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.
Clearly you don't have any evidence otherwise. Right now Google is winning the AI race, Facebook has a decent the, and Microsoft just keeps making jokes. No good AI research has come out of there sinc e clippy.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
If an AC actually earned enough mod points to be visible, then I might see it. Not even free-riding in my case, since I never get any mod points to give.
If the ACs are actually providing some humor and not getting moderated into visibility, then that's yet another aspect of the brokenness of the moderation. However I am unable to recall any evidence to that effect. Nor I am able to think of any example of humor or joke that is enhanced by coming from an anonymous source.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
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.
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.
Actually, Trump is a puppet placed by the AI to sow distrust for human rule. Trump doesn't know this, of course.
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/
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 ?
Anywhere they cant get cheap h1bs to do the work or farm it back out overseas anyway.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
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
Many, many people would have died after the US abandoned the refugees crowded in the city in Cambodia. No matter who moved into the power vacuum to take control.
Obviously there are complex geopolitical reasons for the 'genocide' that occurred. ('genocide'? were they not all the same nationality?)