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.
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
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.
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.
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