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.
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 -
-
-
if we continue with the property framework than AI operator error is the liability of the owner of the AI. this might make for an important legal status distinction in rent vs. own with e.g. AI driven vehicles.
-
I think we agree on the problem but not on the solution. I don’t see a lot of benefit to giving software a legal status other than property. Especially if you mean something like personhood.
-
I have little optimism for a future where I have to sue a software / data collection for its bitcoin earnings after it ran over my bicycle.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.