maybe - could also be that big stock of effectors makes (human/AI-initiated) takeover easier, or coop on 1 paves way for other
-
-
-
That argument could work for any kind of automation or robotics that is remotely controllable. Or just IoT in general
-
To some extent, sure, though I think moreso for systems specifically designed for killing/power projection.
-
I'd consider the guns to be a simple distraction. One side of the divide is general intelligence, the other side is all mere technology.
-
It's not impossible that cooperation on something with "AI" in the name would pave the way for other cooperation on AI, but... 1/2
-
...I worry that what's more likely is people in the international security community concluding that "AI safety" people are ignoramuses. 2/2
-
that would indeed be bad. Seems plausible, not sure about likelihood. Doesn't help when vague call for governance described by media as ban
-
(governance of any sort maybe naive, or ban feasible, I don't know)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Seems reasonable.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
For once, the Terminator image is sort of relevant!
-
It's not a "Terminator," it's a police robot operating on a government-contract(sociopathic governance goal structure) from "Robocop" remake
-
I was referring to the image of the T-800 that's embedded within the article.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.