Here's hoping for a Butlerian Jihad... or, you know, just introducing privacy legislation that make specific outcomes, not methods, illegal – in the same way that murder is illegal, regardless of method, tools, etc.
While Tethics and AI are buzzwords du jour, the problem is more general: The weakening of liberal democratic values.
We need laws and regulation that guarantee privacy more concretely as a foundational right.
Spot on, America, and West such, wouldn't have a reason to worry in the first place if it managed to maintain the integrity of the Western bloc after the cold war.
By letting its foreign policy wonder into grey area by playing overtures with regimes of all kind without any reservations, it allowed for norms, and boundaries to be blurred, and resolve of its camp blunted.
What is happening now, is that the whole Western camp have descended into whataboutism with relation to what rogue regime each bloc member is playing ball with, without no authority left in the bloc "clean enough" to police it.
What rogue regimes made to the West in the last 20 years, is nothing, but a gang initiation in reverse.
First they lured the West into playing their dirty games, and when Western countries thoroughly dirtied their hands, then come and say "your hands are as dirty as mine, what's the point fighting now?"
The US economy is at the mercy of the tech industry.
How does that saying go? "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it".
Thank you Google.
It’s a good, chilling read but this sentence right at the end bothered me.
“Until they secure their personal liberty, at some unimaginable cost, free people everywhere will have to hope against hope that the world’s most intelligent machines are made elsewhere.”
I don’t agree, with the “right” people in charge, the intelligent machines pose a risk to humankind everywhere.
I agree with that intelligent machines pose a risk regardless of who has the best intentions, but its also true that certain countries (namely china) have demonstrated that they are more willing and motivated to use it for devious surveillance purposes.
There is a lot to read here, but it is all important and all possible. I don't know that it can even be stopped at this point, it's just an index to check on periodically to confirm "ok, that's how far down the path we are right now".
"Predictions" are pointless. It's wrong, and just about everything that is good and decent about human life and the human mind is endangered by it. So I'm against it, regardless of the "chances" of whatever outcome. I know what's required for human dignity, I will rather die than betray that, and if everybody thought that way, it would be over in one week. That they don't is their problem and something for them to find peace with. I don't worry about that nor about saving the world, my sole responsibility is being worthy of having been born into a better one, or into the same one among better peers. That is within my agency, and only I can let it slip.
Stuck at home with more time on my hands I've been rereading a lot of old sf. I just finished the last of John Twelve Hawk's 4th realm trilogy which has a modern technological Panopticon society as it's central theme. While some of the technological speculation is strictly fiction, it's surprising how much the series (last volume published 2009) foreshadows modern surveillance trends. The trends mentioned in the article could have dropped right into the story.
Does the technology exist? Can we put the genie back in the bottle? So then what?
This article and a lot of the literature assumes the same tools are not also turned upon the managers of society (i.e. that they get to use the times in secret). Many fear that knowledge of our lives will support interference in our lives. Perhaps any such interference must be just as observable and prohibited by law in a free society.
Who watches the watchers? We all could. When there is a conflict or question we have records to review and public opinion to adjudicate.
Of course we would have to rethink a number of assumable cultural expectations.
"A crude version of such a system is already in operation in China’s northwestern territory of Xinjiang, where more than 1 million Muslim Uighurs have been imprisoned, the largest internment of an ethnic-religious minority since the fall of the Third Reich."
There's so much in this article that merits comment / discussion, but this sentence really jumped out at me. I'd been vaguely aware that this kind of thing was happening in the PRC, but not at this historic scale....
Western values matter more than ever. Here's hoping for a sea change this fall.
Pro tip: If you ever find yourself in a semi-professional discussion, I would avoid referring to democracy, human rights, and individual freedoms as "Western values." Attaching a specific cultural and anthropological carte to what I view more as universal values that have yet to take roots universally, is exclusive and counter-productive. For one, China went through a period of Western domination starting in the 19th century, and Chinese people haven't forgotten that. Asking China to follow Western values in this context is about the worst thing you can say. Just because these concepts originated in the Western world should not preclude one from putting them in the context of the larger human enterprise. Do not ask, "Why shall China not walk in the footsteps of the West in giving its people the right to shape their destiny?" Ask, "Why shall the Chinese people not be at liberty of shaping their own destiny?"
It doesn't benefit the rich and powerful to bring attention to what is going on in Xinjiang and to Uighurs. Just like IBM, Hugo Boss, Coca-Cola, etc. made money in Nazi Germany, the likes of Volkswagen, Nike, etc. are making money today by turning a blind eye to forced re-education camps, forced labor, etc.
As much as I hate Trump, I must admit that the alternative at the time involved continuing to pretend China is an ally.
HRC was a principal driver of the Trans Pacific Partnership. I've heard claims that it was about containing China but they've always come with no citations. My general understanding was that the TPP would have made it easier to outsource to China even more, harmonizing (at least on paper) IP law to allow more outsourcing of things like programming, radiology, CAD, IT, accounting, paralegal, etc., which could have been a final nail in the coffin of the US middle class. These are among the last upwardly mobile middle class jobs that remain in the United States. While it's true that US manufacturing remains a large component of GDP, automation and efficiency gains have made it a declining contributor to employment.
I categorically cannot vote for Trump because he is a racist and is associated with fascists (categorical blacklist in my mind) and is personally constitutionally unfit to be president, but I fear that Biden will return us to a course of pretending China is a friendly nation. Like the last election where I unhappily voted against Trump (not "for" HRC), there is no good choice.
The motive for our China policy is of course the same as the motive for looking the other way at Saudi human rights abuses and their role in 9/11: money. Had Hitler found a way to line American pockets, I wonder if that holocaust thing would have mattered.
It looks like AI will be simple and not prohibitively expensive to develop. So it doesn't matter who "wins the race"---once it exists, it will be available to all.
My personal belief is that the problems are being oversimplified and that is very counterproductive.
I'm sure people will misinterpret what I am trying to say. But, it is framed as a "democracy or tyranny" question. I believe that although the authoritarianism is quite horrific in some ways, in some respects there are actually advantages. Which, if you are still reading, is not to suggest in any way that it is the correct path, but maybe is a hint that our current "democratic system" may not be quite what it is cracked up to be either.
Again, in no
way suggesting we should get closer to a closed system, but I feel like honest evaluation will see very significant deficiencies with western governments such as the United States. For example, looking at the extreme political divide in the country sometimes makes government seem like a joke.
I personally believe that the best and maybe the only way to move forward constructively is to be realistic about the flaws in both extremely divergent views (east and west) and think of a totally new shared philosophy and way for government to operate..
But most likely that will not happen, and I also personally believe that another world war may be stimulated by poor technical adjustment to global accounting collapse (along with the complete failure of cultural and political integration). I think if this occurs then it will prove that humans are not fit to control the planet, and hope that we will soon have competent and (one can hope benign) but much more sophisticated AIs that we can pass the torch of evolution to.
Let's try a thought experiment. Suppose that human intelligence and consciousness are not ends unto themselves: I think therefore I am is false. Suppose that human intelligence is secondary to the will to power, to life, which is merely a chemical that repeats or does not: I am that I am, just an infinite paperclip factory. Suppose what is meant by consciousness and feeling is merely a death/not-death projection machine that attempts to conjure scenarios of fear and joy, dreams and nightmares, through the dimension of time, via memory stored in gray matter. Now this human AI creates a tool which can read the nuances of the human AI and bend them to its will.
There is a major logical flaw in that rhetoric. What good would displaying ads to concentration camp prisoners do? Advertising is fundamentally about getting something that they want from the capabilities of the audience be it votes or money. Concentration camp victims are rather lacking in them - even if you include "ability to resist" which in itself is redudant given the extreme measures of control.
That is like saying "In the dark future of unrestrained capitalism will sell ads to sex slaves chained in the basement - where they have no money or freedom." It might tug at heart strings but it makes so little sense it sounds like an outright parody of such sentiments.
You realize a concentration camp implies concentrating people’s physical bodies into a contained space, right? There are many examples, including right here in the US (border camps, Guantanamo). Being subject to a corporation’s whims is not comparable to being an enemy or prisoner of the state without due process.
Palantir, on the other hand, has a direct role in this process of concentrating undesirables.
A good read. Again, imagine such a government in charge of universal basic income distribution and the majority of 'citizens' dependent on that. Not a bright future.
With such a government, any future wouldn’t be desirable. Imagine such government in charge of unemployment benefits, health services, the military, anything really: it’s grim in any case.
Moreover, universal basic income is universal, by definition. If a government denies it to some particular citizens according to some criteria, it is not universal anymore. It becomes an income provided to anyone who is in favor of the government, which is a very different thing.
So, if universal basic income existed, even the Chinese government would have to give it to everyone... or otherwise give it another name.
Imagine such a government in charge of your basic healthcare determining if you get health care or are put on a waiting list to die, determining what drugs are distributed and what are not and the majority of 'citizens' dependent on that. Not a bright future.
[+] [-] eivarv|5 years ago|reply
While Tethics and AI are buzzwords du jour, the problem is more general: The weakening of liberal democratic values.
We need laws and regulation that guarantee privacy more concretely as a foundational right.
[+] [-] mac01021|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] baybal2|5 years ago|reply
By letting its foreign policy wonder into grey area by playing overtures with regimes of all kind without any reservations, it allowed for norms, and boundaries to be blurred, and resolve of its camp blunted.
What is happening now, is that the whole Western camp have descended into whataboutism with relation to what rogue regime each bloc member is playing ball with, without no authority left in the bloc "clean enough" to police it.
What rogue regimes made to the West in the last 20 years, is nothing, but a gang initiation in reverse.
First they lured the West into playing their dirty games, and when Western countries thoroughly dirtied their hands, then come and say "your hands are as dirty as mine, what's the point fighting now?"
[+] [-] AniseAbyss|5 years ago|reply
How does that saying go? "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it". Thank you Google.
[+] [-] mathieubordere|5 years ago|reply
“Until they secure their personal liberty, at some unimaginable cost, free people everywhere will have to hope against hope that the world’s most intelligent machines are made elsewhere.”
I don’t agree, with the “right” people in charge, the intelligent machines pose a risk to humankind everywhere.
[+] [-] thecreamedcorn|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dccoolgai|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mellow2020|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mcshicks|5 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Realm_Trilogy
[+] [-] cheschire|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] erikerikson|5 years ago|reply
This article and a lot of the literature assumes the same tools are not also turned upon the managers of society (i.e. that they get to use the times in secret). Many fear that knowledge of our lives will support interference in our lives. Perhaps any such interference must be just as observable and prohibited by law in a free society.
Who watches the watchers? We all could. When there is a conflict or question we have records to review and public opinion to adjudicate.
Of course we would have to rethink a number of assumable cultural expectations.
[+] [-] chrisweekly|5 years ago|reply
There's so much in this article that merits comment / discussion, but this sentence really jumped out at me. I'd been vaguely aware that this kind of thing was happening in the PRC, but not at this historic scale....
Western values matter more than ever. Here's hoping for a sea change this fall.
[+] [-] HenryKissinger|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cameronbrown|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zozin|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] api|5 years ago|reply
HRC was a principal driver of the Trans Pacific Partnership. I've heard claims that it was about containing China but they've always come with no citations. My general understanding was that the TPP would have made it easier to outsource to China even more, harmonizing (at least on paper) IP law to allow more outsourcing of things like programming, radiology, CAD, IT, accounting, paralegal, etc., which could have been a final nail in the coffin of the US middle class. These are among the last upwardly mobile middle class jobs that remain in the United States. While it's true that US manufacturing remains a large component of GDP, automation and efficiency gains have made it a declining contributor to employment.
I categorically cannot vote for Trump because he is a racist and is associated with fascists (categorical blacklist in my mind) and is personally constitutionally unfit to be president, but I fear that Biden will return us to a course of pretending China is a friendly nation. Like the last election where I unhappily voted against Trump (not "for" HRC), there is no good choice.
The motive for our China policy is of course the same as the motive for looking the other way at Saudi human rights abuses and their role in 9/11: money. Had Hitler found a way to line American pockets, I wonder if that holocaust thing would have mattered.
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] lehi|5 years ago|reply
There are 1.8 million Palestinians in Gaza.
[+] [-] ALittleLight|5 years ago|reply
AI is a race that absolutely must be won by good actors rather than totalitarian states.
[+] [-] canjobear|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ilaksh|5 years ago|reply
I'm sure people will misinterpret what I am trying to say. But, it is framed as a "democracy or tyranny" question. I believe that although the authoritarianism is quite horrific in some ways, in some respects there are actually advantages. Which, if you are still reading, is not to suggest in any way that it is the correct path, but maybe is a hint that our current "democratic system" may not be quite what it is cracked up to be either.
Again, in no way suggesting we should get closer to a closed system, but I feel like honest evaluation will see very significant deficiencies with western governments such as the United States. For example, looking at the extreme political divide in the country sometimes makes government seem like a joke.
I personally believe that the best and maybe the only way to move forward constructively is to be realistic about the flaws in both extremely divergent views (east and west) and think of a totally new shared philosophy and way for government to operate..
But most likely that will not happen, and I also personally believe that another world war may be stimulated by poor technical adjustment to global accounting collapse (along with the complete failure of cultural and political integration). I think if this occurs then it will prove that humans are not fit to control the planet, and hope that we will soon have competent and (one can hope benign) but much more sophisticated AIs that we can pass the torch of evolution to.
[+] [-] daxfohl|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Havoc|5 years ago|reply
Developments like these will just turn that up to 11
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] WealthVsSurvive|5 years ago|reply
What occurs after?
[+] [-] airstrike|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] foolzcrow|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] tehjoker|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] the-dude|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] bzb3|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] api|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Nasrudith|5 years ago|reply
That is like saying "In the dark future of unrestrained capitalism will sell ads to sex slaves chained in the basement - where they have no money or freedom." It might tug at heart strings but it makes so little sense it sounds like an outright parody of such sentiments.
[+] [-] monadic2|5 years ago|reply
Palantir, on the other hand, has a direct role in this process of concentrating undesirables.
[+] [-] drummer|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dantondwa|5 years ago|reply
With such a government, any future wouldn’t be desirable. Imagine such government in charge of unemployment benefits, health services, the military, anything really: it’s grim in any case.
Moreover, universal basic income is universal, by definition. If a government denies it to some particular citizens according to some criteria, it is not universal anymore. It becomes an income provided to anyone who is in favor of the government, which is a very different thing. So, if universal basic income existed, even the Chinese government would have to give it to everyone... or otherwise give it another name.
[+] [-] syshum|5 years ago|reply