This post collects my views on, and primary opposition to, AI and presents them in a very clear way. Thank you very much on that front. I think that this particular topic is well known in many circles, although perhaps not spoken of, and is the primary driver of heavy investment in AI.
I will add that capital-dominated societies, e.g resource extraction economies, suffer a typically poor quality of life and few human rights. This is a well known phenomenon (the “resource curse”) and might offer a good jumping -off point for presenting this argument to others.
I considered “opposing” AI on similar grounds, but I don’t think it’s a helpful and fruitful approach. Instead, consider and advocate for social and economic alternatives viable in a democracy. My current best ideas are either a new frontier era (exploring space, art, science as focal points of human attention) or fully automated luxury communism.
While I very much would love a new frontier era (I work at a rocket launch startup), and would absolutely be on board with Culture utopia, I see no practical means to ensure that any of these worlds come about without:
Developing proper aligned AGI and making a pivotal turn, i.e creating a Good™ culture mind that takes over the world (fat chance!)
Preventing the development of AI entirely
I do not see a world where AGI exists and follows human orders that does not result in a boot, stomping on a face, forever—societal change in dystopian or totalitarian environments is largely produced via revolution, which becomes nonviable when means of coordination can be effectively controlled and suppressed at scale.
First world countries only enjoy the standard of living they do because, to some degree, the ways to make tons of money are aligned with the well being of society (large diversified investment funds optimize for overall economic well being). Break this connection and things will slide quickly.
Yes, AI will probably create some permanent autocracies. But I think democratic order and responsiveness to societal preferences can survive where it already exists, if a significantly large selectorate of representatives or citizens creates and updates the values for alignment.
Fighting AI development is not only swimming against the tide of capitalist competition between companies, but also competition between democratic and autocratic nations. Difficult, if not impossible.
This post collects my views on, and primary opposition to, AI and presents them in a very clear way. Thank you very much on that front. I think that this particular topic is well known in many circles, although perhaps not spoken of, and is the primary driver of heavy investment in AI.
I will add that capital-dominated societies, e.g resource extraction economies, suffer a typically poor quality of life and few human rights. This is a well known phenomenon (the “resource curse”) and might offer a good jumping -off point for presenting this argument to others.
I considered “opposing” AI on similar grounds, but I don’t think it’s a helpful and fruitful approach. Instead, consider and advocate for social and economic alternatives viable in a democracy. My current best ideas are either a new frontier era (exploring space, art, science as focal points of human attention) or fully automated luxury communism.
While I very much would love a new frontier era (I work at a rocket launch startup), and would absolutely be on board with Culture utopia, I see no practical means to ensure that any of these worlds come about without:
Developing proper aligned AGI and making a pivotal turn, i.e creating a Good™ culture mind that takes over the world (fat chance!)
Preventing the development of AI entirely
I do not see a world where AGI exists and follows human orders that does not result in a boot, stomping on a face, forever—societal change in dystopian or totalitarian environments is largely produced via revolution, which becomes nonviable when means of coordination can be effectively controlled and suppressed at scale.
First world countries only enjoy the standard of living they do because, to some degree, the ways to make tons of money are aligned with the well being of society (large diversified investment funds optimize for overall economic well being). Break this connection and things will slide quickly.
Yes, AI will probably create some permanent autocracies. But I think democratic order and responsiveness to societal preferences can survive where it already exists, if a significantly large selectorate of representatives or citizens creates and updates the values for alignment.
Fighting AI development is not only swimming against the tide of capitalist competition between companies, but also competition between democratic and autocratic nations. Difficult, if not impossible.