Submitted by Baturinsky t3_104u1ll in MachineLearning
KerbalsFTW t1_j36wrtj wrote
> So, why this techology and equipment still open to everyone, without any regulations or limitations?
Mostly AI has been used for good rather than harm. Thus far it is a net good, so you are trying to outlaw a good thing because of an unproven future possibility of a bad thing. But you're ok with biotech? Nanomaterials? Chip research?
But let's suppose that you in the (let's guess) US decide to outlaw AI.
The US now falls behind Europe and China in developing and understanding AI technologies, with no way to get back in the game.
Ok, so let's say Europe agrees with you, then what?
So let's say even China agrees with you....... so now the only people developing AI are the underground illegal communities, and the mainstream researchers no longer even know what AI is.
> So, why this techology and equipment still open to everyone, without any regulations or limitations?
What, exactly, do you propose as an alternative? How do you keep it in universities (who publish in public journals)? And should you?
Cherubin0 t1_j38v1zh wrote
Sure, China is the best example of AI regulations, like concentration camps are now a good thing I guess /s.
Baturinsky OP t1_j38z6vw wrote
I won't argue the existence of those camps. But China definitely got ML training and development running on massive scale, very likely using technologies, uncontrollably leaked from US. So, now we need the goodwill not of just US to contain the danger, but of China too and who know who else.
Baturinsky OP t1_j36yncl wrote
Yes, restricting it just in one country is pointless, which is why major countries should work on this together, like on limiting nuke spread.
Biotech, Nanomaterials, Chip research, etc could require regulation too, though I don't see them as unpredictable as ML now.
And I don't suggest banning AI research - just limiting and regulaing it's development and the spread of algorithms and equipment, so it's less likely to get in hands of underground illegal communities.
PredictorX1 t1_j38if43 wrote
>major countries should work on this together, like on limiting nuke spread.
This is a good parallel: See how much cheating goes on with nuclear material and nuclear weapons.
Baturinsky OP t1_j38kn1z wrote
And yet, we don't have nuclear wars so far.
PredictorX1 t1_j38lht6 wrote
So, your suggestion is that countries- like the United States, China and Russia work together to contain technology? This seems like a serious suggestion to you?
Baturinsky OP t1_j38yn7r wrote
I hate it too. But I don't see any other options that does not carry the existential threat.
KerbalsFTW t1_j3c2q8z wrote
And you trust the governments of the world to make and impose these decisions on us? Because they have such a good track record so far?
Baturinsky OP t1_j3c6wv6 wrote
I hate it, but see no other alternatives safe enough.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments