• Echo Dot
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 year ago

    People getting way overexcited about AI at the moment. If a crime or perceived crime even remotely is related to AI it becomes the main focus.

    Like the person who was hit by a self-driving car, the case was really about a hit and run drive that it hit the pedestrian first and throwing them into the self-driving car. Have the self-driving car not been there and it had been a human driver pretty much the same thing would have happened but they focus on the AI aspect.

    If I used an AI to commit fraud it was me that committed the fraud not the AI but you can be damn sight certain that people would get hung up on that aspect of the case and not the me committing a crime bit.

    It’s the same as when Ford invented the transit van (I have no idea what the equivalent in the US market was). It was faster than most cars at the time, could carry heavier loads, and was physically larger. Inevitably it got used in a lot of bank robberies because the police literally couldn’t keep up with it. And people started talking about maybe having a performance limit on vehicles, when really the actual solution was that everyone else just needed better cars. If they had actually implemented a performance limit, they would have held us back.

      • Echo Dot
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        I thought it was obvious but ok I’ll explain it to you. The story isn’t really about AI, it involves an AI but really that’s got absolutely nothing to do with the crime that was happening, so why we obsessing over it?

        The guy committed a crime. And also as a separate event he used AI.

        The AI did not enable him to commit the crime, the AI did not make the crime worse, the AI did not make the crime possible, and he did not use the AI to plan the crime. The use of the AI was entirely incidental to the crime.