• SleveMcDichael@programming.devEnglish
    58·
    2 days ago

    I don’t believe your analogy holds water. I believe computers are a lot closer to steel than “AI” is, in that they’re both foundational technologies with a very very wide array of proven uses such that the benefits of the development and use of steel/computers far outweigh the associated costs. Weapons/“AI” on the otherhand are both specific, narrower applications of steel/computer technology with a few particular beneficial uses, but those uses pale in comparison to costs of the existence and development these technologies, so much so that both weapons and “AI” should be put on a metaphorical shelf out of reach until we as a global society can grow up to develop and use these technologies in a more responsible and conscientious manner.

    • zd9@lemmy.world
      41·
      1 day ago

      I see what you’re saying, but they’re all on a continuum and it just depends where your perspective window lies. I could see AI as foundational to many new technologies in the future.

      I agree we should shelf any AGI or ASI (which supposedly doesn’t exist yet), however I think AI has many tangibly beneficial applications. The problem comes from the incentive structure of the Epstein class and their investments into surveillance and profit extraction.

    • FishFace@piefed.socialEnglish
      23·
      1 day ago

      Could you directly address the use-cases that the person you replied to brought up, because they seem pretty important to this discussion to get swept aside?

      Forecasting wildfire spread, feeding people better… finding novel drugs, curing illnesses, cheap accurate translation, these all “pale in comparison” to the costs? Even though those uses have all existed for years before ChatGPT?