Conversation

I'm not sure I see any actual alternative to this term, and we may have to bite the bullet and adopt it. Any other term X just gets derailed to 'not saying swears is an important part of X'.
Quote Tweet
ai notkilleveryonism Advantages • “well not saying swears is an important part of not killing everyone” no it’s not • “not killing everyone to who” everyone Disadvantages • scans horribly
Show this thread
Show replies
Thinking of 'robots' as the problem is another misunderstanding that we're trying to avert. Something smarter than you isn't dangerous because you hook it up to a robot or a nuclear weapons system, those are distractions; it's dangerous because it thinks of things you didn't.
2
11
Show replies
They say “blocking swears is woke censorship”, I say “Without ai safety we will be flooded with ai disinformation, harassment, deep fakes and porn.” It’s unavoidable, i’m afraid.
2
Those things are survivable, and if you were advocating to clamp control over the AI field for just that, it would be an extremely debatable position to put it mildly. Slowing down self-driving cars to slow down literally everybody dying afterwards is a stronger argument.
1
5
Show replies
Show replies
Show replies
One problem with this term: the jump from "misaligned AI has ~all the power" to "literally all humans die" is a pretty debatable one (for similar reasons as why humans having ~all the power plausibly won't lead to all chimpanzees or even all mosquitos dying).
4
23
Show replies