[LOCKSUIT]

To those wondering where, give me proof, well just look: DALL-E:
https://openai.com/blog/dall-e/

[Don Patrick]

If only it really were his last.

[MagnusWootton]

POST DELETED FOR RACIST COMMENTS

MagnusWootton,

If you post anything like that again you will be banned.

I suggest you get some counselling about your attitude.

It is not acceptable in any civilized discourse.

Regards,
AIDreams Moderator

[MagnusWootton]

Someones gotta be aware of it, or weve got our heads in the sand, the lot of us.

[frankinstien]

It's disappointing to see someone as influential as Elon Musk conjure up the same old arguments and paranoia since the industrial revolution. The arguments against automation have consistently been proven wrong. Think about it, even the adoption of the dog as a pet ended up replacing human job functions such as village night watchmen, trackers, herding prey, etc and that effectively gave humanity a much greater competitive advantage in its environment. I think I've said this before but dogs are the first non-human intelligence humans harnessed and developed, we learned to hack the dog.

[Zero]

There is, however, something new with Ai and genetic engineering: in these domains, our creations keep getting more and more autonomous. This never happened before. One day, we won't be able to control our creations anymore.

[frankinstien]

There is, however, something new with Ai and genetic engineering: in these domains, our creations keep getting more and more autonomous. This never happened before. One day, we won't be able to control our creations anymore.

Ah...That's is still the same argument that has been posed for automation since it started: "One day we won't need humans anymore!" But the reality is that automation opens new doors for humanity. How we integrate with our new tools is what we might not be clearly able to vision, no differently than BenjaminFranklin could ever have imagined how electricity would be harnessed by society...

[Zero]

You're misreading me: autonomous and automatic are not the same at all. I'm not talking about automation. I'm talking about our autonomous creatures.

Edit: There are 2 doors, and behind each door there is a ready weapon. The door to your left leads to an automatic weapon. The door your right leads to an autonomous weapon. Do you see what I mean?

[frankinstien]

You're misreading me: autonomous and automatic are not the same at all. I'm not talking about automation. I'm talking about our autonomous creatures.

I'd have to disagree with that, an autonomous machine is a machine with automated task(s) that it is empowered to perform whether its to monitor fuel and air intake in a car, flying an aircraft or a probe landing on Mars automating its processes that otherwise a human would be needed is autonomy. That the degree of autonomy will be much more sophisticated in the future makes no difference. Machines have been and will continue to be made to serve humanity...

[Zero]

Sorry I edited my previous message while you were replying.

Ai is definitely not about automation. IMHO if you're not able to understand that, then obviously you can't understand Musk's warnings.

There's also genetic engineering and transhumanism. They'll get out of control too. Well that's how I see it.

[MagnusWootton]

Even automation is dangerous.   Trusting anything to a machine is a risky thing to do,  and there is lives at stake.

Why do you think they dont let auto-cars on the road fully by themselves yet?  Cause its risky as hell.

[infurl]

I'm not sure if self-driving cars are still improving at the rate that they improved initially or if the developers have hit some obstacles that they haven't been able to overcome. Assuming that self-driving cars do continue to get better, they will reach a point where they are safer than human drivers. At that point it may become irresponsible to allow humans to drive, at least in some situations.

[frankinstien]

Sorry I edited my previous message while you were replying.

Ai is definitely not about automation. IMHO if you're not able to understand that, then obviously you can't understand Musk's warnings.

There's also genetic engineering and transhumanism. They'll get out of control too. Well that's how I see it.

Musk's argument of AI takes over the world is a form of anthropomorphization and while most psychologists and psychiatrists don't apply social features of apes to humans, humans do apply ape troop mentalities or social paradigms, that is our evolutionary legacy. An AGI doesn't have to apply such social paradigms so simply being intelligent doesn't necessarily lead to domination or alpha mentalities that want to control humanity. 

The application or implementation of genetic engineering and transhumanism is no different than any other technology that humanity has applied to have a tactile advantage, it is effectively no different than the domestication of dogs or plants into crops...

[HS]

If we continue developing narrow superhuman intelligences, it may become irresponsible to let humans make consequential choices in an ever increasing range of situations. But I also think that trying to optimize situations by focusing on a single variable (like human error), is tricky because that means other important variables (like human freedom) may get neglected.

Maybe oversight by a very general intelligence is the way to go. That might play out more like the concept of synergy developed by Buckminster Fuller, which suggests the idea that the total intelligence of a complex system (like our civilization) is greater than any of its constituents.

The result being that our global civilization ends up organizing itself (and us) more efficiently than any individual could have done, eventually making wars impossible by making them unprofitable and so on. Maybe a general super intelligence could function in a similar role, by working to optimize multiple variables at once.

[Zero]

...that want to control humanity

I'm not saying this is what the problem is. Misreading again?

Maybe oversight by a very general intelligence is the way to go.

I believe that a political system where science guides the democracy would be a more safe and efficient solution.