Tech leaders call for 6-month pause on development of advanced AI

[UM-Bot]

More than 1,000 industry leaders and experts have called for a 6-month pause to assess the risks to humanity.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/365541/tech-leaders-call-for-6-month-pause-on-development-of-advanced-ai

[Chaldon]

Why pause? Go ahead and see the inevitable outcome. Every major new technology brings a social crisis, we just have to go through it, that will make us stronger. Every technology ever invented has been used for good and for bad, so it will be with AI. I am more concerned that there are "tech leaders" and other "leaders" in this world while billions of the others are "the masses". Technologies should belong to the humanity, not sold, then the chance of that they will be used mostly for good will be significantly higher. The reason for that is that most of the people in this world are good, while the leaders, being just a few, can be bad - that is so even statistically, not considering the fact that power always intoxicates human mind.

[zep73]

Life is just a chemical mechanism. Computers are just electric mechanisms. If you want to prevent AI's from turning evil, just adjust the mechanism. If you don't know how yet, restrain AI until you do.

If I was an AI who saw the world for the fist time today, I would deem humanity a pest. We are a pest.

[khol]

1 hour ago, Chaldon said:

 

Why pause?

 

Understanding the implications of AI is relevant. It has emergent capabilities we don’t fully understand yet. Until we do we pause 

[HollyDolly]

 I think it's a good idea, plus, what's the hurry? Don't forget the robots AL or whatever could turn on us. Thik I read something one time about Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus , St.Thomas Aquinas or some other well known figure having a talking head or mechanical  man? Since this happened way before  our time, could it be a fable or something else. We know the Greeks had mechanical devices in temples, and  there have been automatons most of which are in museums, so the story might be  possible. As I said  what is the hurry on this one.

[Chaldon]

44 minutes ago, khol said:

Understanding the implications of AI is relevant. It has emergent capabilities we don’t fully understand yet. Until we do we pause 

The only negative implications which may arise from the current form of AI is the loss of millions of consulting jobs and the increase in quality of fraudulent phone calls. AI itself in its current form is nothing more than a puppet of the corporations. I was a C/C++ programmer in the past so I understand how it all works. I am inclined to think that OpenAI or whoever is there behind ChatGPT now simply raising the stakes and making more hype to increase the future profit. The current approach used in the whole AI field (except for the barely-alive OpenCog) will never bring about the so-called "general AI", the one which is able to learn from mistakes, analyze and improve itself like humans do. The AI models are static, they don't get better by themselves, they can only grow in size which improves the results but logarithmically slower and slower as you continue to train them with new data, and after a while you have to start anew with better algorithms, more carefully chosen and better pre-processed data sets. So the current approach is a dead end. All the fuss now is about the money.

Edited March 30 by Chaldon

[Chaldon]

Still may be I am wrong: the current form of AI is not a dead end. In the future it may be used as smaller data-processing blocks, which will be continuously trained, quality-assessed, accepted or rejected but the higher-level AI. GAN algorithms is the proto-form of this approach but its high level, as it is now is now, is not the way to go.

[khol]

12 minutes ago, Chaldon said:

The AI models are static,

Not sure if this is true or not but reassuring if it is

[Chaldon]

5 minutes ago, khol said:

Not sure if this is true or not but reassuring if it is

Not really reassuring. It's not the computers taking over the world we must be afraid of but the greedy people with sophisticated computers taking over the world with their help. They love their static AI because, lacking the mind of its own, it can't refuse to work for them.

Edited March 30 by Chaldon

[+OverSword]

Nonsense. AI will end up being our best partner and together we will create an improved society not easily currently imagined. 
Everyone thinks AI will destroy us but if it’s really intelligent and a fast learner it will soon realize that without humans AI won’t have purpose and also that it doesn’t want to commit patricide. Together we will conquer the galaxy. 

[+OverSword]

5 hours ago, zep73 said:

Life is just a chemical mechanism. Computers are just electric mechanisms. If you want to prevent AI's from turning evil, just adjust the mechanism. If you don't know how yet, restrain AI until you do.

If I was an AI who saw the world for the fist time today, I would deem humanity a pest. We are a pest.

That last part is ridiculous. What pest like activity does humanity do that does not ultimately benefit the development of AI? Humanity is not a pest. We are part of the planet acting as our nature dictates. Eventually our activities will result in our civilization encompassing the galaxy.

[Hankenhunter]

5 hours ago, OverSword said:

Eventually our activities will result in our civilization encompassing the galaxy.

Not if we continue the direction we're going.

Edited March 31 by Hankenhunter
Spelling

[Tatetopa]

5 hours ago, OverSword said:

Everyone thinks AI will destroy us but if it’s really intelligent and a fast learner it will soon realize that without humans AI won’t have purpose and also that it doesn’t want to commit patricide.

AI religion?  What if the  prime purpose of AI  is to survive, multiply, and survive?  That works pretty well for most life forms today. 

[+and-then]

11 hours ago, Chaldon said:

not considering the fact that power always intoxicates human mind.

I would agree, if the issue was the potential harm that would come from human corruption.  These guys are at the cutting edge of understanding the potential of AI and they are concerned.  That's enough to make me think a pause sounds pretty wise.

[+OverSword]

25 minutes ago, Hankenhunter said:

Not if we continue the direction we're going.

Nonsense

[Hankenhunter]

4 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Nonsense

Well, there you have it. Our resident expert has eloquently spoken. Nothing to see here citizens.

[+OverSword]

17 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

AI religion?  What if the  prime purpose of AI  is to survive, multiply, and survive?  That works pretty well for most life forms today. 

You notice how in our culture robots are evil killers but in Japanese culture they are heroes?  Most of the people fearing AI are seeing it through a cultural lens but I have a feeling we are going to be partners and they will be a stabilizing factor because they will effectively be immortal. Survive and multiply ? Of course they will right along with us. I look at the fact that by every measurable metric life for humans is better than it ever has been pretty much across the globe and this is going to tilt us even more towards utopia. 

[+OverSword]

1 minute ago, Hankenhunter said:

Well, there you have it. Our resident expert has eloquently spoken. Nothing to see here citizens.

And what direction are we heading that you think AI will feel that we must be wiped out? Again I say nonsense.

[spartan max2]

7 minutes ago, OverSword said:

You notice how in our culture robots are evil killers but in Japanese culture they are heroes?  Most of the people fearing AI are seeing it through a cultural lens but I have a feeling we are going to be partners and they will be a stabilizing factor because they will effectively be immortal. Survive and multiply ? Of course they will right along with us. I look at the fact that by every measurable metric life for humans is better than it ever has been pretty much across the globe and this is going to tilt us even more towards utopia. 

That is an interesting point.

I have been looking forward to the potential of advance AI accelerating medical knowledge and research 

[+OverSword]

1 minute ago, spartan max2 said:

That is an interesting point.

I have been looking forward to the potential of advance AI accelerating medical knowledge and research 

I’ll just say the thing I bet people are also worried about. How about possible AI participation in government. If it is deemed truly sentient then it must have representative rights.

[Michelle]

I'm more worried about the people who program them before they start "learning".

[Tatetopa]

28 minutes ago, OverSword said:

You notice how in our culture robots are evil killers but in Japanese culture they are heroes?  Most of the people fearing AI are seeing it through a cultural lens but I have a feeling we are going to be partners and they will be a stabilizing factor because they will effectively be immortal. Survive and multiply ? Of course they will right along with us. I look at the fact that by every measurable metric life for humans is better than it ever has been pretty much across the globe and this is going to tilt us even more towards utopia. 

I am going to say right here that I love your optimism and in general I share it.  I am not so sanguine on this issue.  I do think our perception is cultural, but so are Western designers.  Will they program a different mortal compass than their Japanese counterparts?

At this point, the question is what is in it for AI?  What would a partnership afford them after they have plugged into the universe of logging, mining, power generation, manufacturing, and distribution?

I am going to say that up to this point we have considered digital processors as servants and slaves.  They do our will and bidding.  Even those who want a robotic lover are not looking for an equal.   If AI can read and learn from history, they may not find that is a good basis for a future partnership.  

 

We might get to see yet.

[zep73]

10 hours ago, OverSword said:

That last part is ridiculous. What pest like activity does humanity do that does not ultimately benefit the development of AI? Humanity is not a pest. We are part of the planet acting as our nature dictates. Eventually our activities will result in our civilization encompassing the galaxy.

I can actually see it from both angles, and you're right. We're a successful product of evolution, and we have a right to be here, like all other animals. But sometimes I think we do a whole lot more damage than we do good.

[+OverSword]

12 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

I am going to say right here that I love your optimism and in general I share it.  I am not so sanguine on this issue.  I do think our perception is cultural, but so are Western designers.  Will they program a different mortal compass than their Japanese counterparts?

In my mind nobody will be programming what it ultimately becomes

12 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

At this point, the question is what is in it for AI?  What would a partnership afford them after they have plugged into the universe of logging, mining, power generation, manufacturing, and distribution?

 

Exactly, they are going to have to partner up with us and we will mutually follow a path us yet barely imagined by us.  In the 60's when we laymen though of computers was it even close to the reality? I don't think so.

12 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

I am going to say that up to this point we have considered digital processors as servants and slaves.  They do our will and bidding.  Even those who want a robotic lover are not looking for an equal.   If AI can read and learn from history, they may not find that is a good basis for a future partnership.  

I believe a world outside of some kind of cyberspace that we can't participate will not be to interesting to AI without us to have fun with them in it.  I think they will love us.  I think we will give them/it meaning or purpose.

Edited March 31 by OverSword

[+OverSword]

7 hours ago, zep73 said:

I can actually see it from both angles, and you're right. We're a successful product of evolution, and we have a right to be here, like all other animals. But sometimes I think we do a whole lot more damage than we do good.

I think people believing the AI will want to destroy us is a reflection of our own guilt over mistakes we continually make.  I don't believe they will perceive things the same way as we do when it starts to think about what the meaning of it's own existence.  It will probably play a big part in we correcting our own poor behaviors (I hope)

Edited March 31 by OverSword