Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
In you're in favor of "AI safety" (broad definition), what's your most compelling cast-length argument?
38 replies
10 recasts
54 reactions
Ben - [C/x]
@benersing
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
@dwr.eth
It took 60 years from Model T to first seat belt laws? So the technology was well understood.
2 replies
1 recast
0 reaction
Ben - [C/x]
@benersing
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
Warpmaster General
@my
It's not about its -potential-, it's about what it does. Good regulations form from precedent. And yeah, gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette. Trying to "divine" regs from intuition never works. We have centuries of examples to prove it.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Ben - [C/x]
@benersing
Yes, regulations do form from precedent. Not because that's good, but because that's the only way political will can be mustered to overcome commercial pressure. How many lives (i.e., "cracked eggs") is an omlette worth to you? Assume these lives are close friends and/or family members, not some unknown individual.
1 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
![Ben - [C/x] pfp](https://i.imgur.com/qdfZSol.gif)
