Hawking is extrapolating from a faulty basis. Musk mainly has a big ego and has had some luck. He also is using a faulty or no basis.
Now, sure, if either of them had invested the few years it would take to get up to speed in the AI field, they could likely maybe contribute something worthwhile to it. As it is, they are talking out of their behinds, because they are do not know what is going on.
It really does not matter how great they are in their specialty, if they ever had bothered to find out the actual state of the art in AI, they would not be making the statements they are making about it. Even great thinkers will be wrong when they venture unprepared into a difficult topic area. That is the real lesson here.
And that is just it: "Taking over" the world requires general intelligence. Nobody has even the faintest idea how to create that. It is not a problem of available computing power or memory. And there are very good reasons to believe it will not "happen by itself".
Hence the whole idea that this could happen is about as realistic as a Zombie Apocalypse: Nice topic for fantasy stories, no connection to reality.
Indeed. While vaccination is pretty much irreversible, getting maimed or killed by the things you typically vaccinate children again is also pretty much irreversible. And once they are sick, it is too late for vaccinations.
Same here. Statistical optimization is not perfect (you can still get hit, even with a low probability), but it is a whole lot better than the alternatives. Especially when you take into account that a lot of dangerous things are optimized this way, because that is the main approach to risk-management.
Oh well, I tried. No way to cure stupid. Incidentally, there are statistics in large companies where they can demonstrate reduced sick-days when they started giving free flu-shots to people, but those would not convince you either, so I will not bother looking them up.
It would not be shocking to learn of newly-identified problems with vaccines, particularly in newer formulations. Though it would be shocking indeed to learn of problems worse than polio, measles, mumps, rubella, etc. because we know that without vaccines those will kill and maim large numbers of people every year.
And that is just my point. It requires a really huge problem with a vaccine in order for it to be worse than what it cures. That means the main risk-management part of the science has been settled long ago. And it is the risk-management angle the anti-vaxxers are attacking. (Without understanding it...) Details may evolve, but they are, you know, details.
So you actually believe only Science that you have verified yourself? That is pretty stupid. Because it means you basically cannot belief anything scientific. Even only verifying basic math and very basic physics takes a lifetime. I take it you also verify every CPU down to the transistor-level before you use it? Oh, wait, you will have to verify transistors first. Pretty tricky and expensive for the ones used today.
The actually scientific approach is to build up a good body of basic knowledge, verify a random election of it, and then do plausibility checking on the statements scientists in the relevant fields make about things. Incidentally, scientists do lie and they do fake experiments. Reviewing papers has taught me that. But in the harder sciences, it is pretty hard to get away with this in the harder sciences and make it a scientifically accepted fact. It is relatively easy in areas that few scientists care about and that have little impact on the rest of the scientific field. These lies usually only get discovered when somebody tries to build on the claims and finds out they do not actually hold up.
Yes. And now do the same for companies that produce food (and lump them all together as well, please, as you have done for your example). Should you stop to _eat_? Or should you start to find out what the actual details were, the players, the motivation, the Science?
Indeed. Most people have no idea what Science can do and what it cannot do. Most people are unable to verify a fact more complicated than the existence of gravity (not talking actual numbers here, that most people cannot verify either, despite a stop-watch, a coin and some pretty basic math being all it takes). We tech-folks can do these things and the brighter ones of us have done them countless times and _know_ this approach works. But the average person is still using the old mechanisms of trust and belief that predate Science. Consequentially, they get screwed over all the time, because they understand nothing and are easy targets for manipulation. And when some of them pick some arbitrary things to make a stand on, they usually pick wrong. This is just one more instance of that going on.
You seem to be unable to understand anything but black and white statements. Flu vaccines have a probability of working that is pretty good compared to what they prevent and what they have in residual risk.
This, unfortunately, is the standard case with the average person: They love their own misconception more than they want to actually understand what is going on. Probably because thy are scared to death.
You have no clue how Science works. Here is a hint: It is pretty easy to "buy" something that is actually true, but almost impossible to buy an obvious lie in Science. Of course, in public opinion, things are a bit different.
Slashdot Mirror
Hawking is extrapolating from a faulty basis. Musk mainly has a big ego and has had some luck. He also is using a faulty or no basis.
Now, sure, if either of them had invested the few years it would take to get up to speed in the AI field, they could likely maybe contribute something worthwhile to it. As it is, they are talking out of their behinds, because they are do not know what is going on.
It really does not matter how great they are in their specialty, if they ever had bothered to find out the actual state of the art in AI, they would not be making the statements they are making about it. Even great thinkers will be wrong when they venture unprepared into a difficult topic area. That is the real lesson here.
And that is just it: "Taking over" the world requires general intelligence. Nobody has even the faintest idea how to create that. It is not a problem of available computing power or memory. And there are very good reasons to believe it will not "happen by itself".
Hence the whole idea that this could happen is about as realistic as a Zombie Apocalypse: Nice topic for fantasy stories, no connection to reality.
So you want what, scientist starting to do propaganda and effectively lie to people? That would make things worse.
Anecdotal evidence is nice to point out directions to investigate. It is not useful to actually prove anything.
I would suggest that this seem so to you due to a problem on your side.
Indeed. While vaccination is pretty much irreversible, getting maimed or killed by the things you typically vaccinate children again is also pretty much irreversible. And once they are sick, it is too late for vaccinations.
Same here. Statistical optimization is not perfect (you can still get hit, even with a low probability), but it is a whole lot better than the alternatives. Especially when you take into account that a lot of dangerous things are optimized this way, because that is the main approach to risk-management.
Well said.
Indeed. Well said!
Many Scientists have working ethics and that prevents manipulation of people. The competition usually does not. Just look at politics and religion.
Also, most Scientist are not in this for power or "winning". They know they have won. The other side is just too stupid to realize that.
You must be completely unaware of the actual research in this area.
Oh well, I tried. No way to cure stupid. Incidentally, there are statistics in large companies where they can demonstrate reduced sick-days when they started giving free flu-shots to people, but those would not convince you either, so I will not bother looking them up.
It would not be shocking to learn of newly-identified problems with vaccines, particularly in newer formulations. Though it would be shocking indeed to learn of problems worse than polio, measles, mumps, rubella, etc. because we know that without vaccines those will kill and maim large numbers of people every year.
And that is just my point. It requires a really huge problem with a vaccine in order for it to be worse than what it cures. That means the main risk-management part of the science has been settled long ago. And it is the risk-management angle the anti-vaxxers are attacking. (Without understanding it...) Details may evolve, but they are, you know, details.
This is a long-term thing. In the short-term Science can and has been be manipulated. As I said, you are clueless.
So you actually believe only Science that you have verified yourself? That is pretty stupid. Because it means you basically cannot belief anything scientific. Even only verifying basic math and very basic physics takes a lifetime. I take it you also verify every CPU down to the transistor-level before you use it? Oh, wait, you will have to verify transistors first. Pretty tricky and expensive for the ones used today.
The actually scientific approach is to build up a good body of basic knowledge, verify a random election of it, and then do plausibility checking on the statements scientists in the relevant fields make about things. Incidentally, scientists do lie and they do fake experiments. Reviewing papers has taught me that. But in the harder sciences, it is pretty hard to get away with this in the harder sciences and make it a scientifically accepted fact. It is relatively easy in areas that few scientists care about and that have little impact on the rest of the scientific field. These lies usually only get discovered when somebody tries to build on the claims and finds out they do not actually hold up.
Yes. And now do the same for companies that produce food (and lump them all together as well, please, as you have done for your example). Should you stop to _eat_? Or should you start to find out what the actual details were, the players, the motivation, the Science?
Language is a living thing, Mr. language-nazi.
Indeed. Most people have no idea what Science can do and what it cannot do. Most people are unable to verify a fact more complicated than the existence of gravity (not talking actual numbers here, that most people cannot verify either, despite a stop-watch, a coin and some pretty basic math being all it takes). We tech-folks can do these things and the brighter ones of us have done them countless times and _know_ this approach works. But the average person is still using the old mechanisms of trust and belief that predate Science. Consequentially, they get screwed over all the time, because they understand nothing and are easy targets for manipulation. And when some of them pick some arbitrary things to make a stand on, they usually pick wrong. This is just one more instance of that going on.
Indeed.
You seem to be unable to understand anything but black and white statements. Flu vaccines have a probability of working that is pretty good compared to what they prevent and what they have in residual risk.
Interestingly, the texts by Goebbels are still in use as teaching materials. A true master of his game, if an utterly amoral one.
This, unfortunately, is the standard case with the average person: They love their own misconception more than they want to actually understand what is going on. Probably because thy are scared to death.
You have no clue how Science works. Here is a hint: It is pretty easy to "buy" something that is actually true, but almost impossible to buy an obvious lie in Science. Of course, in public opinion, things are a bit different.
Fascinating.