|
|
|
|
|
by exodust
2950 days ago
|
|
> a large part of the negative coverage stems from irrational fear or misunderstanding of AI... Irrational? No. At the heart of this demo is deception. After the deception comes "impressive tech" and all the rest. Booking hair appointments is one thing, but we all know these systems will be babysitting our children, teaching them new things, and responding to their verbal prompts. Emotional development in children is crucial for psychological health. FAKE synthetic emotion is not healthy, it's not cool. Having "Googlers" at the top of the ethics pyramid for AI systems in our homes, is worth a healthy dose of fear and loathing. "We are Google. We don't need to fake demos [of our fake human voice]" is precisely why Google shouldn't be dictating the terms of AI standards around ethical concerns and communication disclosures. This is about more than hair appointment bookings. |
|
You seem to conflate this with another issue with the demo: It was so good that it seemed real, and you deem this to be deception/deceptive.
While I may share some of your concerns, I can't help but compare it to the rants against video games: unhealthy, fake social interaction. Often used by politicians without any scientific backing of their claims.
I do understand the current attraction from the general public to the unsurprising AI research going on at top labs. You don't need any relation to the field to muse about killer robot singularities and 2000 year old ethics philosophy, and no one will brand you a fool like they did to the people warning about earth-eating black holes at CERN.