Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by nickpp | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

nickpp

Except that countries letting people freely use AIs unencumbered will quickly outcompete luddites.

You cannot regulate progress.

View on HN

You also can't explain why progress for the sake of progress is a good thing.

"Progress for the sake of progress is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward Abbey.

... and is also the ideology of every single species on Earth from bacteria to higher mammals and humans (we're not special). And it applies within species and across species.

The evolutionary equilibrium can only appear from matched competitors which implies that each advancement (or its counter) gets eventually distributed around which means - AI for all.

> .. and is also the ideology of every single species on Earth from bacteria to higher mammals and humans (we're not special).

we ARE special

we are the only form of life on Earth that has (at least in some places) chosen to not expand ourselves at the expense of everything else

some humans value the natural world, unpolluted waters, general quality of life over having as many children as possible

Nature doesn't pursue progress, but fosters any that appears. Sometimes. I think that's a major difference.

Your reply makes sense for balance within humanity. It doesn't for balance between humanity and all other species, which is odd, given how your post started out.

You'll have to take that up with Mother Nature and its evolution & natural selection. She's the one who imprinted "progress" in our genes and I do not think we are far enough from our origins to overwrite that.

Comparing natural selection and human invention is a drastic over simplification. Meaningful change due to natural selection takes place over thousands of years of random genetic mutations and changing environmental conditions. Change due to human invention is happening on the scale of years or decades and is the result of us making decisions just because we can. Would you really like to compare the evolutionary change from species that walk on four legs eventually becoming bipedal to the change caused by industrialization or nuclear technology?

The level of impact humans have managed to have on the world around us is massively different from any other species we're aware of. No other species appears to sit around making decisions that reshape large portions of the environment in a single generation. "Progress" in that sense is not genetically ingrained in us, it can't be if we're the first species to do this.

Nature doesn't pursue progress. It fosters any (at least some) that might appear but it doesn't actively pursue it. If it did, there would be instinctual drive to seek out ionising radiation proportionally to the amount of offspring for particular species. To iterate as fast as possible and get any edge in selection.

What evolution optimises for isn't what you'd call "good" if it came up in any other context.

It's as much why covid happened as it is why we happened.

Evolution and natural selection have nothing to do with "progress".

No, the regulation will ensure a certain level of quality and will require a serious effort from AI makers. Also it ensures that the AI doesn't spread false information and destroys our country in the process.

I doubt we can uphold those standards even in people.

If the last 4 years have proven anything, it is that we cannot agree what is true and what is false for a population. And to have that across different countries… impossible.

Regulation can't ensure anything, it can only change incentives.

Good, the current incentives are pretty perverse.

You should still be able to use them freely. "Who profits" is what should be regulated. If this can't be mandated at a global level, autarky starts looking like a pretty good option.

Any country allowing people and organizations to steal things from other countries outcompete luddites.

Drop all treaties. You cannot regulate progress.

That's exactly what the US is doing with China. China isn't going to play fair in high-tech no matter what 'regulations' you come up with, so the solution is simple, decouple.

Progress toward what?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com