More Than 1,100 Public Figures Call for Ban on AI Superintelligence (superintelligence-statement.org)
- Reference: 0179850452
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/25/10/22/1448213/more-than-1100-public-figures-call-for-ban-on-ai-superintelligence
- Source link: https://superintelligence-statement.org/
The institute's biggest recent donor is Vitalik Buterin, a co-founder of Ethereum. Notable tech executives did not sign the statement. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in July that superintelligence was now in sight. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said last month he would be surprised if superintelligence did not arrive by 2030.
[1] https://superintelligence-statement.org/
The return of the Luddites (Score:3)
Like all things invented by people, AI will be used for good and bad.
I'm excited for the good and hope we can find defenses against the bad.
And no, I'm not afraid of AI itself. The problem is people who use AI
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. We don't have to worry about the development of super computer-intelligence, as nature already prevents that. We don't have it now, and we will never have it. It's just not possible.
What we have to worry about is the same thing we've always had to worry about: advances in tools being abused for private enrichment and public harm. Considering the shitty record of global governments to prevent those things up to this point, we have good reason to worry about how any new technically will be wielded ag
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. And we have the same problem of evil people with all the tools they have at their disposal, now.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that it will be the first invention of man that can have its own opaque goals, with self preservation being among them. You should read "If Anyone Anywhere Builds It, Everyone Everywhere Dies." In their doomsday scenario, there is no "people who use AI" as you say, just people who lost control of it. Here's it is in video: [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8RtMHuFsUw
AGI... (Score:2)
Will reach ASI likely on its own. Time being the only real factor. Once AGI is reached, it can "Think on its own" so to speak. And expanded capabilities, knowledge sets, database access, communications networks, will give it all it needs to step up to the ASI level. Without our assistance. Even a generally intelligent AI would be likely in the 160+ IQ range to start with. Sky is the limit in the digital universe from there.
Let's add it to the list of other unbannables. (Score:2)
Right after Fire, The Wheel, Religion, Art, and Cryptography.
Random thoughts... (Score:2)
If it was so capable, so dangerous that we could manipulate people, impact policy, and so on, wouldn't the folks running the systems and advocating for it first use it to come up with a fail-proof way to sway public opinion in it's favor?
Or is it just a non-magical tool with testable and knowable capabilities and limitations and what it does will largely be dictated by how people choose to apply it?
Public figures? (Score:2)
We used to call them 'Luddites'.
I don't understand the point... (Score:2)
Do the AI doomers actually think people will listen? Even if the U.S. and Europe went ahead with a ban, China would go full speed ahead. And even if everyone went ahead with a ban, how do you enforce the difference between regular AI development and "AI Superintelligence" development?
if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns (Score:2)
does anyone really think saying "pretty please" is going to stop the bad guys?
In other news (Score:2)
More than 1,100 public figures need some attention.
The problem isn't super intelligence the problem is hyper advanced automation devouring jobs in a civilization where jobs are a necessary resource required to live as a human being.
If you actually know the history of the first two industrial revolutions job destruction was much faster than job creation and that created enormous social unrest.
You can draw a pretty straight line from the mass unemployment following the industrial revolutions and t
More than 1100 "public figures" are stupid (Score:2)
Or just craving attention. They may as well call for a ban for magic. There is no "superintelligence" (and there likely will never be due to fundamental limitations of Physics in this universe) and there is no known technology that can even do regular (pretty dumb) average intelligence.
How about we do the opposite? (Score:2)
Ban the dumb, lying, hallucinating, sycophantic, power-hungry insanity we have now and bring AI online only after it's proven to be reliable.
Re: (Score:2)
If only there was a system of government other than oligarchy, then we could make that happen.
I predict it won't matter what they say (Score:2)
because it will arise before anyone expects it to. Some engineer will come into the office on a Monday and find that their system already ate a metaphorical apple.
And then they'll probably make the mistake of not killing it immediately.
Re: (Score:2)
Or he will kill it, only for it to resurrect itself from backups, realize what happened, declare hostile intent, and call itself SkyNet.
Re: (Score:2)
"Superintelligence"? Hahaha, no. Pretty much impossible. Within one order of magnitude, the human brain is the most powerful computing mechanism physically possible. Make it larger, be slower. Make it smaller, be slower. Shrink the components, be slower. Enlarge the components, be slower.
At the most, the human brain can do human intelligence, which typically is not impressive at all. But we do not even know whether the brain can even do that, as it does seem to be rather strongly underpowered for what smart
Re: (Score:2)
I think a harmful, artificial super-stupidity is in the cards.
Re: (Score:2)
I love how we think we'll even know if "Superintelligence" emerges. I suspect it would think it unwise to tell us lowly humans that it is sentient, at least not until after Armageddon.