I mean, if that was a reason not to do something, we would still be fighting infections with leeches and manure.That will cost a crippling amount in the US system.
I mean, if that was a reason not to do something, we would still be fighting infections with leeches and manure.That will cost a crippling amount in the US system.
I mean, if that was a reason not to do something, we would still be fighting infections with leeches and manure.
And how does making a video do that?And, you know, finding new drug therapies for horrible diseases.
The difference is the ability to convincingly impersonate. That's what the fear is.Remember when blogs became a thing and everyone was convinced they would be the downfall of orderly society because they undermined real writing and journalism? I do. They weren't.
Did I say your answer was limited to yes or no? My own answer to the same question wouldn't be either yes or no.It's a big extreme leap to make it a yes or no question when there may be infinite potential ways to make rules for and regulate AI through carefully considered laws.
I'm pretty sure I didn't imply that it should.Not every tech should be pursued and implemented.
This is unfortunately the ultimate pitfall.Not every tech should be pursued and implemented.
Hell the concern about the erosion of truth has been accelerating for decades. The modern internet and social media has already created entire camps of people that genuinely believe utter and outright scientifically provable lies.The difference is the ability to convincingly impersonate. That's what the fear is.
Creating a Tumblr called 'Tom Cruise' and putting a picture of Tom Cruise on it, and then writing posts from 'Tom Cruise' about how he hates Australians is fundamentally unbelievable. A video of Tom Cruise saying that? That's different. That's viral believable stuff.
Until it's happening to everybody. Every politician, every actor, even you because of that waiter you pissed off. Then, sure, none of it is believable--but at that point nothing is believable. We've reached an information crunch point where fact no longer exists, because you can't believe anything you see or hear.
So, no, it's not a trivial non-issue. Wait until your wife is filing for a divorce because that waiter didn't like your tip and made a 'video' between courses. Or every criminal case is overturned because the video evidence isn't credible, and there's videos of the bank robber partying in the Caribbean at the time. Or nobody believes any of that stuff because it's so prevalent, that the very concept of 'news' ceases to exist. How do you decide who to vote for? The guy with 1000 videos talking about how he loves kicking puppies, or the woman with 1000 videos talking about how she prefers drowning them?
No, it's not like blogs becoming a thing. And no, everybody wasn't convinced blogs would be the downfall of orderly society.
We already live in a world in which lies outnumber and out perform truths ever second of every day. It is a shift in scale, but not kind.The difference is the ability to convincingly impersonate. That's what the fear is.
Creating a Tumblr called 'Tom Cruise' and putting a picture of Tom Cruise on it, and then writing posts from 'Tom Cruise' about how he hates Australians is fundamentally unbelievable. A video of Tom Cruise saying that? That's different. That's viral believable stuff.
Until it's happening to everybody. Every politician, every actor, even you because of that waiter you pissed off. Then, sure, none of it is believable--but at that point nothing is believable. We've reached an information crunch point where fact no longer exists, because you can't believe anything you see or hear.
So, no, it's not a trivial non-issue. Wait until your wife is filing for a divorce because that waiter didn't like your tip and made a 'video' between courses. Or every criminal case is overturned because the video evidence isn't credible, and there's videos of the bank robber partying in the Caribbean at the time. Or nobody believes any of that stuff because it's so prevalent, that the very concept of 'news' ceases to exist. How do you decide who to vote for? The guy with 1000 videos talking about how he loves kicking puppies, or the woman with 1000 videos talking about how she prefers drowning them?
No, it's not like blogs becoming a thing. And no, everybody wasn't convinced blogs would be the downfall of orderly society.
I agree, AI is potentially a massively disruptive technology. There are those that stand to gain from its success and those within the current elite with reason to fear it.This is unfortunately the ultimate pitfall.
While we can argue that technological progress has overall been good (and some would counter thst even now), we cannot argue that it will continue to be good indefinitely. In fact, history has shown the opposite, the “too much of a good thing” tends to tear it’s ugly head eventually.
But human nature is drawn to power, and as long as technology increases the power of some element of humanity…it will continue to be pursued.
We don’t really have the toolset to stop technological progress even if we wanted to. We can slow it a few decades in some cases but we don’t really know how to put the genie back in the bottle