The logical end of the ‘Solution to bad speech is better speech’ has arrived in the age of state-sponsored social media propaganda bots versus AI-driven bots arguing back

  • @xkforce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    61 year ago

    OpenAI is so concerned that AI will do x and y bad thing but still pour all these resources into developing it further.

    • Spzi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      There are other endeavors where a great deal of the effort is put into making it safe. Space travel for example.

      I wish that was the case for AI development. AI safety is a notoriously underfunded, understaffed and still overall neglected field.

      • @xkforce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If someone knows that what they’re about to create is going to do harm like this, they shoulder some of the responsibility for those consequences. They dont just get to wash their hands of it as if they had no idea.

        • @Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -11 year ago

          Why not. The people who are to blame are the people commuting the act.

          The thing itself has no ethical or moral impact until it’s used by a person. I think it feels good to blame an inventor but that’s scapegoating the real culprits. Only way I see your argument making sense is if they intended their tools to be user for unethical reasons.

          • @xkforce@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            6
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Because people should consider the pros and cons of what they work on not just pretend that none of the responsibility for those cons is theirs. AI is one of the things that could wipe out humanity. Not in the terminator sense but through unparalleled distruption of the economy and by facilitating a wedge between people through the production of propaganda like none that weve ever seen. i.e deepfakes, personally tailored propaganda etc.

            • @Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              to wipe out humanity

              Does it? Doesn’t that threat exist even without AI. At its current state its a glorified chatbot. Get rid of it, we still have every think tank filled with quants, statisticians, social scientists and marketing teams pushing all that propaganda. Its not AI doing it. Its humans.

              But AI does have potential to also develop new medicines. New materials. It has potential for a lot more good.

              It also has a lot of potential to give people some powerful pocket access to some basic services they normally wouldn’t have. Imagine an AI trained to help people sort out their finances. Act like an r/askdocs. Help with questions about new hobbies.

              So where you see panic, other people see hope. And it isn’t the inventors job to tell you or others how to use something.

              If we destroy ourselves with every bit of advancement then we deserve it. It would be an inevitability.

      • @etuomaala@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        In that case, would you object to the posting of detailed schematics on the internet for the creation of nuclear weapons?

    • @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      The incentives to continue development are far too great; if one firm abandons the project, that just means that AI will be developed by a less ethical firm. This is why arguing that AI is bad in-and-of-itself is a moderately effective way to reduce the ethics of the average AI developer.