As a persistent critic of AI hype, I should be glad for backlash. A new wave of Important Thinkpieces from Famous Pundits say AI is impossible, we don’t need to worry about it, etc.
Most are riddled with glaring illogic, false analogies, motivated reasoning, & factual errors
-
Show this thread
-
You can’t meaningfully evaluate prospects for AI without understanding enormous quantities of specific technical details. Pundits on both sides have utterly inadequate knowledge, and just express their emotional reactions to imagined outcomes in fictional scenarios.
2 replies 2 retweets 42 likesShow this thread -
Even setting facts aside, “We don’t know for sure that an AI apocalypse is possible even in principle” is an astonishingly bad argument for ignoring the hypothetical danger. Finding myself way more sympathetic to Singularitarian doomsayers than previously.
4 replies 0 retweets 38 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Meaningness
Huh, not me (agree with the rest of the thread). Real AI risks are elsewhere (bias, power imbalances, unaccountability, privacy loss) and not really about AI, they are in the union of AI and systems of power (political, military, economic). Singularitarianism is a distraction.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mtraven
Yeah, I’m “sympathetic” in the sense that I can feel how annoyed they must be reading this stuff. Pervasive surveillance + statistical crunch is a huge and real danger; I’m reluctant to call it “AI” but I guess words mean whatever people use them to mean.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness
Would be good to have some new terms to distinguish AI_(high powered data mining) and AI_(autonomous sentient agents).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
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.