cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/52046585

We make buildings install fire extinguishers for safety. Should AI plants be forced to install something that can shut it down in an instant?

  • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    23 days ago

    The utility of a nuclear stockpile is as a deterrent against a threat that we know exists (hostile foreign powers). The utility of this is a deterrent or response to, what exactly? A hypothetical AI beyond what we currently have the tech to make, and which if built probably would not behave in the way that it is fictionally portrayed to, such that the button is unlikely to actually be pressed even if needed (consider that the AIs we have already can be used to persuade people of things, so if we somehow managed to actually make a skynet style super-AI bent on taking over the world, rather than suddenly launching a war on humanity, its most obvious move would be to just manipulate people into giving it control of things, such that the one in charge of pressing the button would pretty much be itself or someone favorable to it, long before anyone realized pressing it was even necessary).

    • 🇾 🇪 🇿 🇿 🇪 🇾@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      I get what you’re saying when AI can manipulate, it will try to make sure the button never gets pressed. But humanity isn’t dumb either. We’ve spotted and contained world-ending risks before. Why assume we wouldn’t notice this one?

      • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        Have we? the closest I can think of is maybe the ozone hole, and that wasnt quite world ending as far as I understand it so much as a danger to people’s health.

        • ZDL@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          23 days ago

          Smallpox may be another one if the current Secretary of Health’s brain worm doesn’t decide that smallpox is good for your health or something.

          • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            23 days ago

            which of those have we actually done anything about? weve made some modest efforts on global warming but not enough to actually solve the issue, overpopulation was never really a serious issue in the first place, nuclear weapons still exist and still could be used someday, and the space stuff we have only the beginnings of an idea about how maybe deal with someday, except maybe asteroids and comets, which we have an idea of what to do but not the infrastructure to launch a big enough craft to redirect a big one in time.

          • ZDL@lazysoci.al
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            23 days ago

            Apparently you don’t.

            We’ve done nothing meaningful to contain global warming. Comets? That’s a laugh! What do you think we have that will stop a comet from creating a huge mess if it happens to be pointed to us? (You’re aware that Armageddon was a fictive movie, right?) And with solar flares and nearby supernovas you’ve entered the realm of delusion. What, precisely, have we done to “contain” solar flares and supernovas?

        • 🇾 🇪 🇿 🇿 🇪 🇾@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          23 days ago

          Socrates (470–399 BCE) — ethics, questioning, Socratic method

          Plato (427–347 BCE) — forms, justice, ideal state

          Aristotle (384–322 BCE) — logic, science, virtue ethics

          Confucius (551–479 BCE) — ethics, family, social harmony

          Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527) — political realism

          Francis Bacon (1561–1626) — scientific method

          René Descartes (1596–1650) — rationalism, “I think, therefore I am”

          Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) — social contract, Leviathan

          Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677) — pantheism, ethics

          John Locke (1632–1704) — empiricism, liberalism

          Gottfried Leibniz (1646–1716) — monads, optimism

          David Hume (1711–1776) — empiricism, skepticism

          Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) — social contract, human freedom

          Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) — categorical imperative, critique of reason

          Georg Hegel (1770–1831) — dialectics, history as progress

          Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860) — pessimism, will to live

          John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) — utilitarianism, liberty

          Karl Marx (1818–1883) — materialism, class struggle

          Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) — will to power, eternal recurrence

          William James (1842–1910) — pragmatism, psychology

          Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951) — language, logic

          Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) — being, existentialism

          Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) — existentialism, freedom

          Simone de Beauvoir (1908–1986) — feminism, existential ethics

          Michel Foucault (1926–1984) — power, knowledge, institutions

          Hannah Arendt (1906–1975) — totalitarianism, political theory

          Noam Chomsky (1928– ) — linguistics, political philosophy

          • ZDL@lazysoci.al
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            23 days ago

            Ah. If you redefine “contain[ing] world-ending risks” to include “literally anything that someone blathers about” you can continue that line of blather forever.