David MatchettNov 25, 2023
Jack Rusher
“The [automatic machine/artificial intelligence] is not frightening because of any danger that it may achieve autonomous control over humanity... Its real danger is the quite different one that such machines, though helpless by themselves, may be used by a human being or a block of human beings to increase their control over the rest of the human race.”
— #NorbertWiener, The Human Use of Human Beings, 1950
Nov 24, 2023 at 8:57pmWeb
Show threadBjörn GohlaNov 24, 2023
@jack amazing what insights one can have when not deluded.
Show threadThe DoctorNov 24, 2023
@6d03 @jack Makes you think about why things are the way they are today, doesn't it?
Show threadBjörn GohlaNov 24, 2023
@drwho @jack No clue. Maybe we don't teach enough social philosophy.
Show threadThe DoctorNov 24, 2023
@6d03 @jack I don't think a lot of places teach any.
Show threadAlex Celeste, Princess Consort of BurnoutNov 24, 2023

@jack
"a machine can never be held accountable, and therefore -"

"awesome! when can we ship?"

Show threadgideonroNov 25, 2023
@jack amazing book. Just reading it now actually.
Show threadGolden Bunny of Destiny 🕯Nov 25, 2023

@jack Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Frank Herbert, Dune

#GBOD

Show threadJack RusherNov 25, 2023
@davew Yeah, Herbert seems to have been influenced by both Wiener’s popular work and Butler’s Darwin Among the Machines
Show threadMark vWNov 25, 2023
@jack Authorize massive punitive damages for AI decisions resulting in unlawful acts. Don't allow manufacturers to insulate themselves from liability when they make AI enabled products intended to be used with user-supplied AI software--especially when harm to third parties results. Strip copyright and patent protection from AI software with any potential to cause defined harms.
Show threadNefarious CeltNov 25, 2023
@markvonwahlde @jack why limit this to AI. We have had laws against this since 95.
Show threadMark vWNov 25, 2023
@NefariousCelt @jack I don't understand your question. I'm not suggesting that any previously lawful behavior should become unlawful. I am concerned about AI makers and users trying to dodge liability (or $ damages) by using legal structures.
Show threadsimsa03Nov 25, 2023
A true 1950s banality, charcaterizing the problem(s) as one of omnipotent machines vs. omnipotent humans. That machines, like all tools and tech #infrastructure, create preferences, necessities, and practical constraints that contribute to and determine the options human beings have in their decisions, in fact, the human-machine symbiosis that is in existence since the Palaeolithic, is conveniently ignored in favour of a conception of man of free agency. That is rubbish. Not only with regard to man-in-environment constraints, but also with regard to an underlying scientism that relies heavily in its naïvety on a primitive 19th and 20th century Empricism.
Show threadmike_hales 💔*!?¿*Nov 25, 2023
Norbert Wiener tried to alert folks. Even approached labor unions. But they were embedded in the 'progressive' myth of the End of Labour through automation. Fully automated luxury communism. Huh! Who needs enemies, when you have dumb leaders like this! @jack