Being a Nobel prize, head of state, or holding a prestigious stance in society does not mean you understand what you are talking about. And I do not trust much UN (basically a mafia organization that does lots of signaling work and does not even represent the human population).
Also, these international treaties were not proved to work or to be robust to emergency cases.
If it comes, it need to come from the streets and the homes. If random people tomorrow drop AI, I guarantee you things will change. You need to focus on the basics, with a bottom-up approach.
First of all, I appreciate your energy and time, and I am not saying all of this is not useful.
Second, I have a feeling that on this forum there is too much rationality going on, and less talk about random chance, human behavior, and so on.
Said this.
Point one
I am not sure how these surveys were done, but if they were done in a naive way they might be wrong (e.g. election polls are biased if you do not frame well questions).
And even if they were true and many people say they are against AI, they probably use it indirectly, as they are consumers of other services.
My point is that people, pro- and against- AI, are using products that are exploiting the power of AI in some way, and hence they are fueling incentives in expanding AI capabilities/applications.
Even DuckDuckgo is using AI. There are too many incentives everywhere to use it.
It is on the end user to deny the application of AI to their everyday life.
Point two
We need to look at this from multiple perspectives. And I tell you why I think this is different wrt biological or nuclear weapons.
AI is becoming/sourcing addiction around people. People are addicted to ChatGPT (e.g. it represents some safe space to them), or to social media scrolling. Go around on trains and buses. Everybody is on their phone. People lost ability to get bored! Moms are not looking anymore at their babies. Friends are constantly interacting on their phone, and AI will become their friend. Crazy.
So, once people become addicted to it, it will be more difficult, on average, to get away from it. And they will fuel more and more the process of self-improving AI systems. They will give big companies opportunities to do work. This attracts money. And money attracts talent (I mean, I would also like to work on something fun that makes me money, and forget about consequences on the very long term).
I would say this sort of addiction is similar to the alcohol one. It is border line. Did the ban of alcohol in US work? Will the ban on AI work? This will depend on the people. If the base is borderline addicted to it, is difficult to do anything.
This is one of the cases that you can not really change someone if they do not change themselves within.
All of this process will come back to Point 1: fueling economical incentives in a greedy system. We need to come back to first principles, and teach people basic principles.
Unfortunately, our current society is one of low self-consciousness, easy to manipulate and steer. We really think we are smarter and better than our ancestors, but truth is we are not.
Being a Nobel prize, head of state, or holding a prestigious stance in society does not mean you understand what you are talking about. And I do not trust much UN (basically a mafia organization that does lots of signaling work and does not even represent the human population).
Also, these international treaties were not proved to work or to be robust to emergency cases.
If it comes, it need to come from the streets and the homes. If random people tomorrow drop AI, I guarantee you things will change. You need to focus on the basics, with a bottom-up approach.
Doubts.
Why would random people drop AI? Our campaign already generated 250 mentions and articles in mass media, you need this kind of outreach to reach them.
Many of those people are already against AI according to different surveys and nothing seems to happen currently.
First of all, I appreciate your energy and time, and I am not saying all of this is not useful.
Second, I have a feeling that on this forum there is too much rationality going on, and less talk about random chance, human behavior, and so on.
Said this.
Point one
I am not sure how these surveys were done, but if they were done in a naive way they might be wrong (e.g. election polls are biased if you do not frame well questions).
And even if they were true and many people say they are against AI, they probably use it indirectly, as they are consumers of other services.
My point is that people, pro- and against- AI, are using products that are exploiting the power of AI in some way, and hence they are fueling incentives in expanding AI capabilities/applications.
Even DuckDuckgo is using AI. There are too many incentives everywhere to use it.
It is on the end user to deny the application of AI to their everyday life.
Point two
We need to look at this from multiple perspectives. And I tell you why I think this is different wrt biological or nuclear weapons.
AI is becoming/sourcing addiction around people. People are addicted to ChatGPT (e.g. it represents some safe space to them), or to social media scrolling. Go around on trains and buses. Everybody is on their phone. People lost ability to get bored! Moms are not looking anymore at their babies. Friends are constantly interacting on their phone, and AI will become their friend. Crazy.
So, once people become addicted to it, it will be more difficult, on average, to get away from it. And they will fuel more and more the process of self-improving AI systems. They will give big companies opportunities to do work. This attracts money. And money attracts talent (I mean, I would also like to work on something fun that makes me money, and forget about consequences on the very long term).
I would say this sort of addiction is similar to the alcohol one. It is border line. Did the ban of alcohol in US work? Will the ban on AI work? This will depend on the people. If the base is borderline addicted to it, is difficult to do anything.
This is one of the cases that you can not really change someone if they do not change themselves within.
All of this process will come back to Point 1: fueling economical incentives in a greedy system. We need to come back to first principles, and teach people basic principles.
Unfortunately, our current society is one of low self-consciousness, easy to manipulate and steer. We really think we are smarter and better than our ancestors, but truth is we are not.