Hacker News Reader

Comment by fchollet | Hacker News Reader

Like every other technology, AI has risks and benefits. The main issue here, is that we are letting fear dominate the discussion, and that fear is not based on any supporting facts or evidence.

Meanwhile, we are completely missing the discussion we need to have about the realistic, short and medium-term dangers associated with the development of AI. Intelligent automation is about to disrupt economic production and existing power balances, much like software has done not too long ago, with significant social consequences. This is what we need to be talking about, and preparing for. We need to plan for a smooth transition to a post-AI world.

Regulating AI for fear that it may take over makes about as much sense as outlawing space travel for fear of aliens. Can we start having a sane discussion about AI now?

View on HN

I'm not sure why it hasn't come up, but my biggest fear is that a powerful nation will use AI for their own advantage, mostly in the form of propaganda and mass manipulation through Internet. That's at least my fear, and I think that "AI taking over" is complete bullshit. Although, if let loose, AI could even accidentally manipulate humanity into any non-positive state. We know that being easily manipulable is probably the biggest vulnerability of humans (and there's lots of history to prove that).

What comes to regulations, I think it should be required by law that AI identifies themselves as AI on the Internet discussion boards and social networks. I'm not sure how it's possible to enforce this requirement (without needing proof from everyone that you're human). Captchas are already too difficult (only bots get in these days). Popular captchas (such as Google's ReCaptcha) are also centralized, which is dangerous because it gives the captcha-owner a controlling position.

> my biggest fear is that a powerful nation will use AI for their own advantage, mostly in the form of propaganda and mass manipulation through Internet.

Chances are it is already happening. More advanced AI will give governments and corporations the ability to do the same in a much more effective way, and on a larger scale. Large-scale intelligent data mining will make it possible to use people's data to build actionable models of what they think, what they will do next, and how to affect what they think and do. Better than humans could.

It doesn't even need to occur through sockpuppets, so the anti-sockpuppet regulation you propose would be not only highly intrusive but also ineffective. Here's an example: Facebook can manipulate your emotional state by selecting what goes into your newsfeed [1].

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/29/facebook-u...

If AI is so dangerous even for the owners, it will end up next to nuclear missiles, as a dissuasive artefact.

Some military research centers may have developed something that is far more advanced than whats available in public. (Wouldn't be surprising, considering their ridiculous budget.)

Perhaps this talk about dangerous AI in the past year is to acclimate the public to thinking about this issue before the reveal.

Having just finished Influx by Daniel Suarez [1], your comment rang a little eerily.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Influx-Daniel-Suarez/dp/0525953183

-- TL;DR Synopsis --

Secret government agency with hyper-advanced technology (AI, fusion, gravity control, etc.) keeps scientific advances from the general public and gradually trickles them out once they feel they can control the response properly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com