Quick dumb question: does it seem like saying AI development is a threat to the climate a convenient excuse to put a stop to a technology that is disruptive to existing corporations and systems of power?
With the current state of AI, it actually strengthen the people already in power.
With deep learning, the more data and computing power you have, the better your system will be. For that, you need lots of resources, which big corporations and "existing systems of power" have. This will let them have the best AIs, making them even more powerful.
This positive feedback loop is, I think, the most credible AI-related threat.
Yes. I do want to be clear that we should be mindful of the mistakes made during other technological revolutions that negatively impact the environment.
- if we get full AGI, it is likely to kill us all as a side-effect while achieving its imperfectly aligned goals. Hopefully, we are far from it
- even without full AGI, AI can become smart enough to help its users see through the BS/propaganda (dangerous for the most powerful eg, the military budget wouldn't have any sense if AI even slightly aligned with human values)
- the most likely variant: if we believe "no moat" people that generative AI can be democratized, then the hyped fear of AI can be used to push regulations to prevent the democratization, as an anti-competitive measure, so that only few corporations may access the technology legally.
Valid question. My statement is a bit vague. I see AI as a disruptive technology similar to the printing press or radio. It enables regular people to accomplish task that were previously difficult. I can see it becoming a tool that makes some major companies obsolete in the way it opens up new paths. But fair point, a lot of these AI advancements are being pushed forward by large corporations like Microsoft and Google. It’s obvious that AI as a tool will be used for good and evil. Tech companies who wish to survive see the necessity to get in on the bottom floor of this technological leap forward.
Either way, my observation is simply that I could see a lot of parties finding the advancement of human potential through AI to be harmful to the status quo that they comfortably exist in.
The advancement of humanity doesn't have to take place at all for AI to brick civilization. Here's a quick fill in the blank: Automation of most routine jobs involving reports, accounting, or other routine clerical/office work leads to _____________. If you guessed mass unemployment (with all of the economic and social upheaval that entails) you got it right. And that happens when AI tools are as good as your average office worker at the task in question. Just average.
I don't think that's what people are afraid of. It sure as heck isn't what I'm afraid of. Unless you count "humanity" as the existing system of power, and "something much smarter than humanity" as the disruption.
You over there pretending it's the people that have concentrated the world's wealth and political power that get disrupted? Are we doing crypto-will-democratize-finance again, but with AI this time?
With deep learning, the more data and computing power you have, the better your system will be. For that, you need lots of resources, which big corporations and "existing systems of power" have. This will let them have the best AIs, making them even more powerful.
This positive feedback loop is, I think, the most credible AI-related threat.