Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by squigz 67 days ago
> I can think of no example in history of the entire world deciding to just forsake the development of a technology because it seemed like it could prove to be too dangerous. The same psychological logic always applies.

Can't you? Haven't many (most?) countries agreed to nuclear disarmament? What about biological weapons? Even anti-personnel mines, I think?
3 comments
hax0ron3 67 days ago
Those weapons are still all being developed and would be brought out in any actually existential war where they seemed useful. The agreements would last only as long as the wars were not existential, or as long as the various countries involved believed that use of them, and the resulting retaliation in kind, would be more destructive than not using them. But one way or another, countries still develop them.
link
dweinus 67 days ago
I don't think it needs to be a binary to be effective. Yes, those weapons still exist, but understanding of existential risk and political pressures have slowed them considerably and resulted in a safer, more cautious world.
link
switchbak 67 days ago
China is rapidly building out their nuclear arsenal as we speak, and the USA is undergoing an expensive replacement process of theirs as well.

That kind of idea might have held water in the 90's, but that's not the world we live in any longer.

link
dpark 67 days ago
> Haven't many (most?) countries agreed to nuclear disarmament?

This misses the point. He specifically said the entire world because the point is that someone will develop AGI (theoretically; I’m not making a statement about how close we are to this).

9 nations have nuclear weapons despite non proliferation agreements and supposed disarmament. It’s not enough for most countries to agree not to build nuclear weapons if the goal is to have no nuclear weapons. Same for AGI. If it can be developed, you need all nations to agree not to develop it if it don’t want it to exist. Otherwise it will simply be developed by nations that don’t agree with you.

(Also arguably the only reason most nations don’t have nuclear weapons is the threat of destruction from nations that already have them if they try.)

link