And then read it. Other than that, I found less novelty in Tegmark's book compared to Bostrom's than I had expected, but one difference is that while Bostrom's book is scholarly quite demanding, Tegmark's is more clearly directed to a broader audience, and in fact a very pleasant and easy read. This is a really important thought, because when we think of authoritarians, we then think of villains and then we think of super-villains, then we think of super-powers, we imagine these guys in uniforms who can stride across the stage of history and do whatever they want. We therefore believe that a military AI arms race would not be beneficial for humanity. Learn from peers in other countries. Can we even prevent their creation? But it is not, or at least Kambhampati does not provide any evidence that it is; in fact, his main concern in the op-ed about the implausibility of a weapons ban being effective just adds to the plausibility of the nightmarish scenario depicted in the video becoming reality.
The next mode is magical thinking, or the open embrace of contradiction.
Friedrich HayekJohn Maynard Keynesnationalekonomi. If a dangerous scenario A is discussed, and we can give a scenario B that is "equally possible", then we have shown that A will not happen. When a government with an authoritarian inclination comes into power, we are in a better position to resist it the more prepared we are, and reading Snyder is one of the best ways to prepare. Frågan om superintelligent AI och huruvida sådan är inom räckhåll för AI-forskningen och i så fall i vilket tidsperspektiv är mycket svår, och även kunniga och intelligenta personers intuitioner går kraftigt isär. Här frågar sig naturligtvis den vakne läsaren: Jag besöker EU-parlamentet i Bryssel för att debattera med bland andra Steven Pinker om framtiden med artificiell intelligens och så kallad rationell optimism.