[statuslover9000]

> The expert believes that “asking for regulations because of fear of superhuman intelligence is like asking for regulation of transatlantic flights at near the speed of sound in 1925.”

This assessment of the timeline is quite telling. If supersonic flight posed an existential threat to humanity, we certainly should have been thinking about how to mitigate it in 1925.

[fulafel]

1925 of course would have been a great time to put limits on fossil fuel use in aviation along with the rest of the fossil fuel applications to manage the biggest current threat to human civilization. (Arrhenius did the science showing global warming in 1896 or so)

[spacebanana7]

Given the dual use of fossil fuels between military and civilian purposes, I wonder whether any state that deliberately handicapped car/aero/petrochemicals would’ve been able to survive the early twentieth century.

Both the USA and Nazi Germany benefited massively from have a civilian industrial base that was complementary to military production.

[echelon]

Miami is still above water.

Would you shut down the powerhouse of our economy -- travel, transportation, energy -- for something hypothetical that hasn't even happened and doesn't appear to be close to happening?

I'm pro-clean energy, but you can't do without fossil fuels. Not if you want society to keep climbing up and up and up.

[CamperBob2]

That sounds like a great way to lose an upcoming world war to some people who DGAF about pollution, climate, or other people in general.

[Simon321]

Well it could be argued that it does, what about supersonic nuclear missiles?

[oh_sigh]

But AI doesn't pose an existential threat to humanity, so we're all good.

[HKH2]

I really can't grasp how people think that a system that doesn't have a need to preserve itself will somehow start thinking for itself.

AI is quite troublesome for privacy though. How much privacy humans need is a question we'll probably have answered the hard way.

[nsonha]

but all the thoughts about it in 1925 would have been way off to how it actually turned out

[calf]

I was thinking one reason Yann LeCun would make such a terrible analogy is because he knows something the rest of us don't.

[seanhunter]

The thing that he knows that (most of) the rest of us don’t is quite a lot about AI.

[thfuran]

And, what, you think he's working against humanity's interest in service of the secret AI overlords?