Top-level takeaway of tonight's catch-up reading on ML... I still find it hard to take AI Risk seriously as a special problem here. There are definite risks but they don't seem qualitatively different from other kinds of engineering risk.
we do have an ethics framework for making that distinction though. the responsibilities of the builder are to deliver a product that behaves according to design spec and applicable safety regulations. operator errors within those bounds are not the fault of the builder.
-
-
our bigger problem is that we don't have an ethics framework for considering the legal status of AI systems. we also don't have an ethics framework for considering the legal status of non-humans. we elide this deficiency in our ethics by considering all non-humans property.
-
I think we can safely ignore this until and if software systems develop a consciousness / self awareness. In the meantime we need to prepare to test, insure, and accept non-deterministic control systems.
-
can you tell me what is the relevant distinction between "consciousness" and "non-deterministic control system"?
-
Let me put it this way, if you want to think hard about when machines qualitatively deserve personhood read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep again and enjoy the mental exercise. But in the meantime I know a 2020 Volvo isn’t that.
-
What it’s doing is making decisions we can’t fully predict during testing. But it’s not a person.
-
not suggesting it has personhood. I'm suggesting personhood is irrelevant in considering of moral agency at the level of regulations for public safety. we don't need to know what it's qualia are like to know that it is making morally relevant decisions.
-
I sort of agree. But I think it’s still a designed product and the onus is on the designer. They don’t have to know every risk, but practically speaking the risk envelope needs to be understood, conveyed to buyers, and insured.
-
exactly. we do agree on this. the regulatory policy ought to be based on harm potential and cost of harm mitigation.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Agree. That’s approximately what I was saying. Maybe it didn’t come out right. Ultimately use of non-deterministic software in control systems moves the non-deterministic part of the system from the social regime under operator control to the builder’s responsibility.
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.