Governments are not going to ban or obstruct data center buildout, given the immense power of Big Tech, the vast amounts of finance involved (which is going to increase), and geopolitical completion.
If it needs to be done, it cannot be done by legal methods, by lobbying or campaigning, but only by Force.
“One man’s Modus Tollens is another man’s Modus Ponens”.
It is not actually insanse. Sir Winston Churchill also advocated a preventive nuclear war against USSR in the late 1940s. The rapid rise of World Communism, whether in Europe (including record high vote shares in West Europe), in China, Korea, Indochina, other parts of the world, convinced them that the biggest ethical goal was ‘Destruction of USSR’.
Stalin remained a thoroughly criminal despot in this period—the Leningrad Purge, Doctor’s Plot, Night of the Murdered Poets, the establishment of Communist Dictatorships across Eastern Europe, with their own ruthless purges and repressions.
USA had the atomic bomb. It seemed the Only Solution to protect liberty.
It is not the first time that people have tried to stop an economic process by campaigning. It is not the last time that it will fail.
The development of AI is a race.
The accelerationist and the doomer souls living in one body apparently.
How about coordinate legal actions to have chatbots banned, like ChatGPT was banned in Italy? Is it possible?
If successful this would weaken the incentive for devealopment of new AI models.
As per a survey, 7% Nigerian Christians like ISIS. That is another example of this phenomenon.
QA sessions.
Some people in this community are thinking out of the box. I fully support this, all options must be on the table.
However, one cannot make universal statements. The efficacy of violent and nonviolent methods depend upon the exact context. If someone believes in an imminent hard takeoff, and gives high credence to Doom, violent activity may be rational.
Exactly my thought, but how to get it done?
Difference in criteria.
In my understanding, this is only possible by rote memorization.
Yes, have you considered any reasonable strategy to provoke a nuclear war, as the worst-case plan to stop AI progress?
Honestly, some of these arguments are laughable, like the ones about aliens and Everett branches. I don’t think that an AI would believe this.
Not public data, at least.
You are contemplating suicide. Seek help.
They are looking to China, perhaps, as a new patron.
We will see in Afghanistan whether banning contraception is one of those viable policies to inflate fertility.
Admitted.
And when the Law refuses to act? What then? Big Tech has immense resources, more than almost any other lobby, to compromise our politics—and to sabotage any effective move to save humanity.
Is there any fundamental moral principle which makes Non-State Violence always wrong?