After the open letter calling for a moratorium on AI development, I publish an exploration of various perspectives on AI existential risk that breaks down the debate into four logical groups, and considerations of the insights that each group provides.
Apr 5, 2023·edited Apr 5, 2023Liked by Chase Hasbrouck
I've been following this stuff for some time now and I think this is an interesting and useful piece of work. It will be interesting to see how this evolves.
One further comment. It seems to me that belief in AI x-risk exists mostly along a Silicon Valley to London/Oxford axis. That suggests to me that x-risk has a cultural aspect to it. Here's a post where I wonder why the Japanese don't seem worried: https://new-savanna.blogspot.com/2022/05/whos-losing-sleep-at-prospect-of-ais.html
Thanks for the very handy and useful categorization of the positions. I hope you keep going in this analysis. I'm in the futurist's camp. I still stand by my analysis, "The Myth of the Superhuman AI" published in Wired way back in 2017. Still valid. https://www.wired.com/2017/04/the-myth-of-a-superhuman-ai/
I feel like the futurist utopian thing is a bit of a stretch. I think there's probably some people like me that think AI risk talk is ridiculous (the 'misinformation' and 'ethics' risks and the x-risks) but also that AI isn't going to be wildly transformative (at least not overnight).
I really despise the x-risk and the 'ethicists' though, because it seems like a pure political play to take control over an emerging technology.
I've been following this stuff for some time now and I think this is an interesting and useful piece of work. It will be interesting to see how this evolves.
One further comment. It seems to me that belief in AI x-risk exists mostly along a Silicon Valley to London/Oxford axis. That suggests to me that x-risk has a cultural aspect to it. Here's a post where I wonder why the Japanese don't seem worried: https://new-savanna.blogspot.com/2022/05/whos-losing-sleep-at-prospect-of-ais.html
More generally, I've been posting on the subject for awhile. This is a link to my posts: https://new-savanna.blogspot.com/search/label/Rogue-AI
Appreciate the graphic and categorization.
Just wanted to share that it may not even be the big labs creating the risk now that so much is public.
AutoGPT seems to be a step along the paperclip scenario.
https://github.com/Torantulino/Auto-GPT
Thanks for the very handy and useful categorization of the positions. I hope you keep going in this analysis. I'm in the futurist's camp. I still stand by my analysis, "The Myth of the Superhuman AI" published in Wired way back in 2017. Still valid. https://www.wired.com/2017/04/the-myth-of-a-superhuman-ai/
Do you foresee the -ists transferring amongst groups as AGI develops further?
Which of these 4 groups would you say would be most closely associated the label “Foomer”?
I feel like the futurist utopian thing is a bit of a stretch. I think there's probably some people like me that think AI risk talk is ridiculous (the 'misinformation' and 'ethics' risks and the x-risks) but also that AI isn't going to be wildly transformative (at least not overnight).
I really despise the x-risk and the 'ethicists' though, because it seems like a pure political play to take control over an emerging technology.