thanks, that is comforting
> the cat is out of the bag even if you don't like it
thanks for bullying us around
> the legitimately talented AI thinkers
who exactly authorised you to project legitimacy in a space that has not seen any regulation?
Who is bullying who exactly?
>who exactly authorised you to project legitimacy in a space that has not seen any regulation?
He's using the second meaning of 'legitimate'
able to be defended with logic or justification; valid.People telling that we shouldn't worry about such topic, because companies are aware of them. Because companies never did bad things just to earn more, right?
Why is it that in a forum skewed libertarian techbros, there's this nigh-religious faith that corporations will not only get AI right, but get its impacts on society right? You know, with their stellar track record and all.
To me this is just another of countless demonstrations of silicon valley ego/hubris.
to make it plain to you, there were thousands of slave traders who dedicated their lives to the topic, including e.g. how to optimally fill-up the ship with bodies. what does this prove?
the idea that meticulous pursuit of a domain somehow gives it its experts the moral high ground or ensures that they will keep it safe for society is so bizarre and alarming it only reinforces the notion that a bunch of people have become completely unhinged
AI practitioners have already proved themselves untrustworthy by putting themselves in the service of entities that invaded privacy and engaged in large scale algorithmic manipulation of e.g. voting. This is not an assumption. Its a dire fact.
More broadly, corporate structures have repeatedly proved themselves untrustworthy, both in the small, with scandals and fraud and at-large, with regulatory capture that ensured their negative impacts on society could go unhindered for decades
Also, is "libertarian techbro" a slur now? Or are you just resentful that I compared faith in progress to faith in a deity?