Comments by "" (@ContinuousDelivery) on "" video.

  1.  @shelleyscloud3651  Sure, my point was that all of these things are irrelevant if we can't solve the first problem, but you are right we need to be planning for the upside as well as the down, and no jobs is the upside!! 😳 These things may be irrelevant but they do add to the complexity, but even so, if we have extinction on one side and "working to agree something with China" (or anyone else that is human) on the other, whatever the difficulties and problems with that, I think that the latter is the better choice, and what we should be working towards. The Chinese will be gone too, so it is in their interests too!  Of course, if we can live with AI, we MUST sort out the immense economic impact. Forgive me, but I don't think that worrying about JOBs is enough, though that is certainly a short term concern of immense importance. I think you and I are agreeing though, I just think that this is a MUCH bigger, more radical change than we are used to thinking about. Ultimately there will be no Jobs, because the successful picture of AI is that the cost of production, the cost of intelligence, will fall to zero. So no jobs at all as we currently understand them now. We will need to establish a different way of supporting people to live their lives, if this works it will presumably kill capitalism, and communism and most other -isms too 😳 I do agree that this is a HUGE topic, but real AI raises lots of HUGE topics, which is why I started posting here in the first place, I like Alister and Rory's take on politics, but my impression is that informed intelligent people like them, who aren't watching what is happening in AI closely, don't understand the magnitude of the challenge. Rory (sorry Rory) said "they will soon be able to write good essays", they may soon be able to do anything that people do better than people, former CEO of Google-X says within the next 2 years, and is advising people not to have children now. What we have built is machines that can learn anything, and they can learn annoying orders of magnitude faster than us!
    2
  2. It is a massive problem, but the majority of the experts are saying that "there is a 10% chance of human extinction because of AI", so it seems to me that there is no alternative to trying to reduce that risk.  I don't think that "what it does to jobs" is the main question, in terms of a hierarchy of needs, existence comes before employment 😉 However jobs is certainly one of the ways in which AI will be hugely disruptive. Most of the AI experts that I have heard talk on this topic are proposing Universal Basic Income (UBI) of some form. Actually many people say that this is mostly a problem of capitalism more than global politics, the Chinese are VERY wary of AI, and limit work on precisely because they can't control it.
    1
  3. They don't need consciousness to be dangerous. Look at the impact of social-media, now think of a world where you can create convincing copies of anyone saying anything, on demand and in automated response to EXACTLY what your interests and political views or prejudices are. We are already there, that can happen now. Then there is the alignment problem, how do we ensure that the goals of the AI, even a non-conscious AI, are aligned with our goals? This is all risky stuff, and you don't need AGI for it to be risky.
    1
  4.  @fburton8  Thanks 😎 I think that certainly the 2nd of those things is pretty close, right now, the first there are forms of it on the way. The memory thing is risky, IMO, because at that point they can "learn live" and at that point evolution is happening in computer-time, not biologic time, and then the progress will be even more exponential, and out of control. There is some interesting stuff on "AI risk analysis" here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.05862.pdf
    1
  5. I am nervous that the politicians aren't frightened enough.
    1