[dany2aa]

Digital immortality: why AI decentralisation is vital for the future of humanity, and it’s not about open markets only
https://medium.com/pandoraboxchain/digital-immortality-why-ai-decentralisation-is-vital-for-the-future-of-humanity-852be0cd9d33

We're waiting for your opinions.

[Art]

Welcome, Dany2aa!

While the concept of Open Ai and no "rules" seems a gallant notion there absolutely needs to be rules at least governing how much power and what kind of power/control an Ai might ever be able to have/use.

I agree censorship is bad but with that said, there are limits to practically everything. Without the barest of guidelines, the world would be in a state of chaos and many humans would be needlessly abused in many ways.

This Ai manifesto is something that really needs to be extremely well thought out and weighed for and against its possible outcomes before it ever becomes the defacto standard for Ai of the near future. Even in these rapidly advancing times in which we live, we must never throw caution and common sense to the winds!

Just my humble opinion.

[LOCKSUIT]

is this about strong AI going public and not privately done? Or digital immortality? Or open public data?

[dany2aa]

Thanks Art for your opinion. I agree with you that in short range -centralization is important but if we consider long term goals - centralization  allure authorities to control and abuse this power.  Lucksuit, it’s about building free decentralized AI, currently this is open source solution that guys create.

[cymbod]

My personal opinion.

I always prefer the middle way between extremes.  There has to be regulation, because people will be exploited in an unregulated environment, this is always what happens.  Artificial intelligence is a market that has many thousands of participants, each with the potential of being the pioneer of great things, but eventually this market will evolve to a few key players, which is when people get exploited, and regulation is desirable. 

On the theme of personal information, I believe that the individual must have full control and ownership over their personal information, and that corporations and governments are blocked out from access to that information without consent.  This means that big data that drives many business models, and upon which machine learning is built upon, is undermined.  If I design an AI entity with a focus upon personal information being locked down, including intellectual property such as images and video, where consent is required to share that information, with the AI entity enforcing this, then there will be a form of regulation, censorship and restriction built in to the AI entity. 

My dream is that internet servers are replaced by AI entities based upon the concept of mesh networks.  A community of a thousand homes might have one AI entity running the network, and because it knows every participant in the network, it can enforce restrictions such as keeping predators away from users who it knows are children, or it can spot patterns that suggests a predator is at work, then can shut down the communication between the parties. 

The paradox is that the type of AI entity I have in mind would create a decentralized network, but will also be the one who is a source of regulation and censorship in that network, without any input from a corporation or government. 

[hakobian]

I see this person has already pressed the button accepting that they give up all their rights.


I will help you.  Please stand by.

[MikeB]

It's like Microsoft v Linux all over again.

Microsoft, Google, Amazon all have stakes in big data and AI...

They sell it actively in ai/tech conferences to businesses to "adopt big data and ai. don't be afraid. ai is nice. ai is good."... In return for all your businesses data, they give you some machine learning...

Nobody needs high tech machine learning for their personal/business data...