• Nougat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Bald-faced appeal to authority, okay. With a side of putting words in my mouth that I clearly did not say.

    The industrial revolution destroyed some jobs, and created others. Destroyed some industries, and created others. We’ve been in an “information revolution” for some time, where electronic computers have supplanted human computers, and opened up an enormous realm of communication, discovery, and availability of information to so many more people than ever before in history. This is simply true.

    Just as the landscape of human physical labor was forever changed by the industrial revolution, the landscape of human thinking labor will continue to be forever changed by this information revolution. AI is a potential accelerator of this information revolution, which we are already seeing the impacts of, even at this extremely early stage in the development of AI. There will be both good and bad outcomes.

    • TheFutureIsDelaware@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Appealing to authority is useful. We all do it every day. And like I said, all it should do is make you question whether you’ve really thought about it enough.

      Every single thing you’re saying has no bearing on how AI will turn out. None.
      If a 0 is “we figured it out” and 1 is “we go extinct”, here is what all possible histories look like in terms of “how things that could have made us go extinct actually turned out”:

      1
      01
      001
      0001
      00001
      000001
      0000001
      00000001
      etc.

      You are looking at 00000000 and assuming there can’t be a 1 next, because of how many zeroes there have been. Every extinction event will be preceded by a bunch of not extinction events.

      But again, it is strange that you can label an appeal to authority, but not realize how much worse an “appeal to the past” is.

      • Nougat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You don’t seem to have actually read anything I’ve written, and just want to argue with someone.

        • TheFutureIsDelaware@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nope. I certainly have. It’s the same arguments I’ve been hearing from people dismissing AI alignment concerns for 10 years. There’s nothing new there, and it all maps onto exactly the wishful thinking I’m talking about.

          • Nougat@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            You don’t seem to have actually read anything I’ve written, and just want to argue with someone.

            Based on the fact that I have not anywhere “[dismissed] AI alignment concerns,” I stand by the above statement.

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bald-faced appeal to authority, okay.

      You understand that the fallacy is the appeal to false authority, right? Not just any authority?

      Swinging the partial names of logical fallacies around like a poorly wielded shield isn’t actually an argument. It’s just an attempt to poison the well.