Dan Romero on Warpcast

Content pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

In you're in favor of "AI safety" (broad definition), what's your most compelling cast-length argument?

42 replies

11 recasts

59 reactions

Ben 🟪 pfp

At fist automanufacturers made similar arguments against requiring seatbelts in cars. Imagine what we’d be saying about our great/grandparents if that line of thinking had prevailed.

2 replies

0 recast

1 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

It took 60 years from Model T to first seat belt laws? So the technology was well understood.

2 replies

1 recast

1 reaction

Ben 🟪 pfp

Yes, that's true: it took 60 years of people dying before the political will could be mustered. The issue was known as early as the 1900s; not too dissimilar a situation from today's AI discussions. AI is not a new technology, its potential is well understood. Regulation isn't going to kill it at this point.

2 replies

0 recast

1 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

> AI is not a new technology, its potential is well understood. Regulation isn't going to kill it at this point. I disagree with all 3 of those statements? :) Every day there's new stuff and we still don't understand it. Hard to regulate something you don't understand effectively.

2 replies

0 recast

1 reaction

Ben 🟪 pfp

Totally fair :) GPTs are new but AI as a field of research goes back to the 1950s. Where we are today has been a long anticipated by scientists. Hard, yes, but important given that our unknowns are the result of the creation itself. Not an outside factor. I don't believe this has ever before been the case.

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

Ben 🟪 pfp

What's an example of a foundational technology that's been evolving for 50+ years that was completely killed off by regulatory guardrails? It could cause a winter, but it won't kill it entirely.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

Nuclear energy. Nearly limitless, carbon free, no dependency on OPEC countries. Yet we just stopped building it for no logical reason (all fearmongering).

2 replies

0 recast

2 reactions

Ben 🟪 pfp

Fair. Digging deeper into nuclear is admittedly on my “to do” list. Wasn't much of the regulation an attempt to avoid another Chernobyl though?

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Thomas pfp

@aviationdoctor.eth

That’s for the US. France, for example, has continued building nuclear, up to the point of it being almost two-thirds of all power generation. And yet France doesn’t allow tinkerers to play with uranium reactors in their backyard. It is possible to be progressive on tech and respectful of the dangers involved.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction