As the #artificialintelligence 'debate' continues & columnists weigh up the warning from #AI firms & #investors that state regulation is required to forestall the development of AI's more damaging aspects, I'm going to say this again.
If you wanted proof of the grip that technological determinism has on us, the AI-regulation call is a great demonstration of its grip.
AI firms & developers have a key device to hall these troublesome developments:
They could simply stop their own work on them!
@ChrisMayLA6
It's like tech companies are making their calls for gov regulation in bad faith, just to shift responsibility off them.
Yep, just like that.
@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 I would argue that such regulation is indeed responsibility of governments, rather than the private sector. In the private sector, the bottom line will always speak louder and the pressure (self imposed or otherwise) for revenue will always come first.
A clear example of that is the entire ecosystem of social media we have today. Preying (and worsening) mental illness, used as tools for misinformation, complete disassociation with reality, all for views and clicks.
@IanStuart @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 That's true. But honestly, I'm much less concerned about existential dangers brought on by A(G)I than I am about all the harm that is already done by leveraging AI (and other tech).
Just came across this post that shares an article on this very topic: https://mastodon.scot/@decembr14/110525711680008739
A sensible, non-hyperbolic article on AI from Kenan Malik. #AI https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/11/big-tech-warns-of-threat-from-ai-but-the-real-danger-is-the-people-behind-it
@vexille @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 Yes. The AI tech we already have is causing issues AND it is being adopted more and more each day.
Personally I am very much against #extremeInequality . In the US wealth and income inequality has now surpassed a 100 year high (and people barely seem to realize).
My most immediate concerns with AI are that it can easily exasperate inequality. I cringe when I see all the hype about profit and stocks regarding AI.
@IanStuart @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 I've heard talk that AI will "improve productivity so much" that universal basic income will be unavoidable. It's not the best outcome of this whole thing, but definitely not the worst.
I'm not optimistic enough to think that scenario is super feasible, but even if it is, it won't solve inequality, just slightly raise the bottom end.
That all said though, I am excited about the technical possibilities, which makes this whole ordeal even more painful.
@vexille @IanStuart @ChrisMayLA6
In a world that has had massive systemic slavery since the invention of writing (and still does), the notion that increased productivity will lead to UBI defies all precedence.
But I love the optimism.
@TCatInReality @vexille @ChrisMayLA6 People have to demand higher standards of living with increased productivity. Easier said than done. Historically with technological advancements regular people saw an improved standard of living (though in the US in the past 50 years it hasn’t been the case).
It’s not that many need to consume more; it’s just that exponentially increasing inequality is bad for numerous reasons including what it means for democracy. #HumanRights
@IanStuart @vexille @ChrisMayLA6
I completely agree
But when the benefits of productivity accrue to the wealthy (as they have for 50 years), it's a really hard cycle to change. It has rarely been successful in all of human history.
Emeritus Prof Christopher May
TC Won't Give In To Lies
Vex
Ian Stuart