Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Apollo24_ t1_it28zqf wrote

Reply to comment by ouaisouais2_2 in Why do companies develop AI when they know the consequences could be disastrous? by ouaisouais2_2

Yes, you are.

You're suggesting we halt all progress because some people could use it irresponsibly. Sure then, let's ban knifes as they can be used as weapons by irresponsible people.

4

ouaisouais2_2 OP t1_it2lxdx wrote

I'm suggesting that we slow it down, put it through more law-enforced security checks and make its application a major political subject, preferably on an internation scale.

>Sure then, let's ban knifes as they can be used as weapons by irresponsible people.

No, that doesn't make sense. What does makes sense, is to not sell atomic bombs to profit hungry CEOs, terrorists or schizophrenic idiots.

1

Apollo24_ t1_it2ucvn wrote

That is not what you were suggesting in your post at all.. you were asking why people don't try to stop AI development, not regulate.

Anyways, let's suppose that's what you were suggesting. Of course there's nothing wrong with being extra cautious, but regulations on international scales for this are just inherently impossible. Not because of greed or capitalism, AI just has such huge potential, any country slowing down their own progress would assure their economic disadvantage in the future, maybe even their destruction.

You'd probably get some EU countries to agree on such regulations, but that'd just make things worse for those countries later on.

3

ouaisouais2_2 OP t1_it39a33 wrote

It might not have been very clear but I said : "inhibit or manage".

>Not because of greed or capitalism, AI just has such huge potential, any country slowing down their own progress would assure their economic disadvantage in the future, maybe even their destruction.

That's exactly what I'd call a trademark of capitalism (mixed with the idiocy of warmongering in general). People are too afraid of immediate death or humiliation to step off a road of insanity.

1