Hacker News Reader

Comment by shahbaby | Hacker News Reader

I'm surprised that people would down vote you for this.

It's a very real possibility that solving intelligence would make most of human knowledge work obsolete.

AI is a choice (that is, it can probably be ignored, if we don't like it). I'm not sure why people think (negative forms of) AI are in some way inevitable. A lot of people are already afraid of losing their jobs right now, where we can't even fathom the basics of intelligence. I don't think humanity would just let some of the negative forms of AI we all seem so afraid of happen.

Tech is not a choice, especially when there are evident benefits from the tech. Like for instance was agriculture a choice, yes maybe for a small while after it was invented. After that it was no longer a choice. Now it's not a choice at all. AI will be much quicker.

Tech is most definitely optional: Nuclear energy was for a while considered a great option, but now a lot of people are (unfairly IMO) turning their back on it, and you see that there isn't as significant a number of new plants built (just to give an example)

Nuclear Energy was a cover story for weapons manufacturing.

"I don't think humanity would just let some of the negative forms of AI we all seem so afraid of happen."

Government and corporations are the ones who will make that call.

Government = Wolf

Corporation = Fox

Average Joe = Sheep

Most of the sheep are protected by a cage; it takes a lot of mental power to operate in the increasingly technical world we've created.

Solve AI and you've removed that cage. Sure we'll still need some sheep but no where near as many as we have right now. Most will be made redundant.

The sheep today that are living fulfilling and happy lives because of their ability to process knowledge marvel at the possibilities of AI and how it could push the species forward but forget to consider what their own role would be in a world where machines are both stronger and infinitely smarter than any human.

I'd modify your metaphor slightly:

Government = The farmer

AI = Plant-based diet

Naively, everyone eating a plant-based diet is great for sheep, but it's hard to imagine a world where the farmer still feeds them.

Governments and corporations are nothing without your Average Joe, in fact, they are just a collection of Average Joes. So I fail to see the analogy here.

In this situation, heads of state and corporate executives are as much 'Average Joes' as kings and queens were a few centuries ago.

Yes, but a government and a corporation is much more than their head of state and corporate executive. If the actions of the government have a significant negative effect on a majority of the population, you can be quite sure that the government will be overturned at some point.

Who's going to do the overturning, though? If all you need is mental labor and capital, and AIs can supply mental labor for anyone... Well, the current holders of capital are going to have quite the advantage.

I think nuclear weapons are a good example of how dangerous technology isn't a choice. When other parties have the ability to advance a technology, you no longer have the option of ignoring it. We can't put that cat back in the bag, and now we live in a world where an accident risks killing billions of people.

As technology advances, we run the risk that the strategic calculus changes in favour of one party pre-emptively attacking the others.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com