WotC Hasbro CEO optimistic about AI in D&D and MTG’s future

[Vaalingrade]

What remains uncertain is causality.

Thirty years of science for you on Line 2, sir.

 

[overgeeked]

The science is in. The science is definitive. Climate change is real and is caused by humans. To deny that is to deny science. Here’s one article on the topic there’s hundreds more.

Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know?

The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia.

climate.nasa.gov

 

[ECMO3]

Ok, when the world where no one has to pay for anything comes to pass, we can make all the AI we want.

What most of the arguments against AI are about is greed pure and simple. People don't want AI taking away their livelihood and their money and they are willing to hurt all of society so they can get as much money for themselves as possible.

I don't think we will get to the point where things are free, but technology consistently makes things cost less, much less. AI art for example is very cheap, nearly free in fact and some of it is actually free. But those who dislike AI would rather people pay more and make it be further away from free.

 

[ECMO3]

The science is in. The science is definitive. Climate change is real and is caused by humans. To deny that is to deny science. Here’s one article on the topic there’s hundreds more.

Climate Change being caused by human activity is scientific fact.

What is not scientific fact is the often touted claim that it is an existential threat. There is little science regarding what it means for the human population of the planet or more broadly life on earth in global terms.

Change is not all bad, and like all types of change there will be both winners and losers when it comes to climate change.

 

[Mistwell]

What most of the arguments against AI are about is greed pure and simple. People don't want AI taking away their livelihood and their money and they are willing to hurt all of society so they can get as much money for themselves as possible.

I don't think we will get to the point where things are free, but technology consistently makes things cost less, much less. AI art for example is very cheap, nearly free in fact and some of it is actually free. But those who dislike AI would rather people pay more and make it be further away from free.

I don't think that's fair. I see a lot of objections based on the incredibly huge energy consumption spike being caused by the use of datacenters devoted to AI which is well outside the predicted range for energy consumption. I don't think that objection is based on greed.

Then there is a new report of on AI posing an extinction-level threat to humanity. Now I don't think it's that, but it does raise some legit questions about the impact AI will have on civilization.

That report says in part, "Current frontier AI development poses urgent and growing risks to national security...The rise of advanced AI and AGI [artificial general intelligence] has the potential to destabilize global security in ways reminiscent of the introduction of nuclear weapons.”

"The report focuses on two separate categories of risk. Describing the first category, which it calls “weaponization risk,” the report states: “such systems could potentially be used to design and even execute catastrophic biological, chemical, or cyber attacks, or enable unprecedented weaponized applications in swarm robotics.” The second category is what the report calls the “loss of control” risk, or the possibility that advanced AI systems may outmaneuver their creators. There is, the report says, “reason to believe that they may be uncontrollable if they are developed using current techniques, and could behave adversarially to human beings by default.”

Those are legit concerns that are not founded in personal greed either. Those concerns are not "willing to hurt all of society so they can get as much money for themselves" and indeed they imply the opposite.

Now I am torn on the impact of AI and can see both ends of that argument. But I certainly do not think it will be all roses like you seem to think it will be. A lot of the Techbros think it will be a Star Trek future and I think that's pretty normal Utopian thinking. Life never goes that direction. It's going to be a mixed bag in all likelihood.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

I know it’s actually neither religion nor politics, but the climate science debate is full of elements from both or those fields. Let’s not pursue that line of discussion further, please.

 

[Zardnaar]

I don't think that's fair. I see a lot of objections based on the incredibly huge energy consumption spike being caused by the use of datacenters devoted to AI which is well outside the predicted range for energy consumption. I don't think that objection is based on greed.

Then there is a new report of on AI posing an extinction-level threat to humanity. Now I don't think it's that, but it does raise some legit questions about the impact AI will have on civilization.

That report says in part, "Current frontier AI development poses urgent and growing risks to national security...The rise of advanced AI and AGI [artificial general intelligence] has the potential to destabilize global security in ways reminiscent of the introduction of nuclear weapons.”

"The report focuses on two separate categories of risk. Describing the first category, which it calls “weaponization risk,” the report states: “such systems could potentially be used to design and even execute catastrophic biological, chemical, or cyber attacks, or enable unprecedented weaponized applications in swarm robotics.” The second category is what the report calls the “loss of control” risk, or the possibility that advanced AI systems may outmaneuver their creators. There is, the report says, “reason to believe that they may be uncontrollable if they are developed using current techniques, and could behave adversarially to human beings by default.”

Those are legit concerns that are not founded in personal greed either. Those concerns are not "willing to hurt all of society so they can get as much money for themselves" and indeed they imply the opposite.

Now I am torn on the impact of AI and can see both ends of that argument. But I certainly do not think it will be all roses like you seem to think it will be. A lot of the Techbros think it will be a Star Trek future and I think that's pretty normal Utopian thinking. Life never goes that direction. It's going to be a mixed bag in all likelihood.

I'm more concerned about job losses on top of the current climate.

History us more my thing wealth inequality is back to early 20th century levels.

That's my big picture nothing else matters foncern as most other things are linked to it.

A few digital artists missing out sad for them but if it spreads to everything else there's a lot of problems there.

 

[mamba]

What most of the arguments against AI are about is greed pure and simple. People don't want AI taking away their livelihood and their money and they are willing to hurt all of society so they can get as much money for themselves as possible

no, it is the opposite, it is an argument to not accumulate even more wealth in the hands of a few people.

If cars can drive themselves, Mr Uber gets all the money and the drivers are out of a job, and so forth.

I do not see preventing this as hurting society, at all

 

[Oofta]

no, it is the opposite, it is an argument to not accumulate even more wealth in the hands of a few people.

If cars can drive themselves, Mr Uber gets all the money and the drivers are out of a job, and so forth.

I do not see preventing this as hurting society, at all

So we should gave never have invented computers? Think of all the people that were put out if a job by the use of Microsoft Excel or the ATM? Except those jobs weren't really lost, the jobs just shifted into different categories.

Technologies that are disruptive are scary. People will lose jobs and have to learn something new. But that has always been true throughout history. Those people that were really good at making stone tools had to switch over once copper and other metals replaced the need for that skillset. Obviously over the past half century or so, computers have accelerated that change dramatically. But disruptive technologies are always coming onto the scene and we always adjust.

We can no more stop advancements in technology than we can stop the sun from rising. All we can do is think of ways to be ready for it and to stay informed about how we will need to adapt to the new world. I spent my life going from one transition to the next. I grew up on a farm but became a software developer writing COBOL. Seeing the writing on the wall I learned VB and databases, then C# then web and ... well the list goes on. During all that time people kept saying that programmers were no longer going to be needed and we were all going to be replaced any day now. It didn't happen, but what I did have to do was develop new skills and I never stopped learning and adjusting.

So I acknowledge there will be difficult times and periods of adjustment. It can and will be difficult for individuals but I just don't believe the doomsayer hype that it's an existential threat to humanity.

 

[mamba]

disruptive technologies are always coming onto the scene and we always adjust.

that is a matter of how fast they get adopted, how widespread their application is, and to a degree what new opportunities they open up

I am not convinced that this will always ‘work itself out’, AI is coming in fast, will be much more widespread than anything before it, and I am not sure it gives many options for adapting to it. Sure, some people will have jobs using it, but tens of millions of jobs will become obsolete / redundant and I am not so sure that most of them find something new

That is only one issue however, we are sliding into a post-truth world, as far as I am concerned we are pretty much there already. Deepfakes and disinformation will make it even harder to identify the truth

We can no more stop advancements in technology than we can stop the sun from rising. All we can do is think of ways to be ready for it and to stay informed about how we will need to adapt to the new world.

and being ready also means putting rules in place, putting taxes on AI, strengthening the social security network, having fines and prison sentences that cannot just be shrugged off as the cost of doing business (as they frequently can today), …

It doesn’t just mean everyone is left to their own devices and should prepare as best they can individually