Science provides descriptions. It reports the ways things work. It’s repeatable and reliable, and it has given us endless services and conveniences. It is undeniably accurate and real. But it doesn’t tell us how things work, let alone why.
If an ad agency is a crusader for truthful AI, you know we’re in trouble.
Google’s position on AI risk is that their work raises lots of problems for us. It’s like Alfred E. Neuman wrote the policy. “What, me worry? It’s YOUR problem.” Only it’s not.
There’s no way that the EU rules as currently described can keep pace with AI development, just as it doesn’t even acknowledge the real risks of AI transforming how we work and live into a neatly choreographed mechanical ballet.
The true impacts of AI are too big and complicated, so those costs are simply left out of the value calculations for companies promoting the tech.
We already lie to one another quite effectively. AI represents far bigger challenges, like destroying our way of life and then the planet.
AI are going beyond their expected abilities to learn from existing data and inventing new ways to assess and apply it. Only they haven’t been coded to do it.
Warnings about AI risk are hypocritical, delusional, or disingenuous. Or all three.
The parallels between Mary Shelley’s fictional AI inventor and the real ones today are shocking and illustrative.
Robots have been making music for a long time. Maybe advanced AI is a hint that people need to get back into the mix?