Anybody else laughing at how the same constellation of scientists who retweet "robots/AI will take over and enslave us" also retweet "fuck ethics boards in science — ethics committees just slow me down without adding anything of value"?
I mean... 
-
-
It’s very easy to get confused and make assumptions. At least good faith seems more common in this network of conversations thab much of Twitter.
-
Interesting. I interpreted Miguel to be implying that progress will be made in this technology regardless, and that *it* will determine real outcomes. e.g. Slowing the Manhattan project because of ethical concerns doesn’t result in 0 nukes; it results in a Third Reich victory.
-
OK, well, we should wait and see then!
-
That also results in a very different meaning taken as “we should wait and see what Miguel means” vs “we should wait and see whether anyone does weaponize AI to take over the world”

-
Breaking News: language is ambiguous.

-
BTW speaking of nukes, I'm not convinced "we" all agree that nukes = winning ww2. https://www.quora.com/Did-US-have-a-chance-of-winning-World-War-II-if-they-didnt-have-nuclear-bombs …
-
My point is definitely not to start a discussion on that issue, but to underline that ethical questions with respect to science are not ever clear-cut things.
- 2 more replies
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.
