Who has given the issue serious consideration? The only example I can think of of someone giving it serious consideration and concluding we don’t need to worry is Robin Hanson, but I really have no idea how to identify, or even estimate the number of people who seriously considered the issue, decided there was nothing to worry about and then went about their lives without mentioning it. Any thoughts on how to approach the question?
It would be special pleading to bring up “Google has seriously considered it” when that is part of “Google has seriously considered it and is hiding it”, yet to not bring that up when it is part of “Google has seriously considered it and has decided it’s nothing to worry about”.
It is of course possible that Google has not considered it at all, but that would apply to Rasputin496′s original suggestion as much as it applies to mine, so mine still would be a more straightforward explanaion than his, even if it’s not the most straightforward explanation on an absolute level.
(If you think I shouldn’t have used the word “most”, but should have said something like “most out of all other explanations that make the same assumptions”, then sure, I’ll accept that.)
The most straightforward explanation of Google’s behavior is:
As you say, they have considered very thoroughly whether there is imminent danger from AI, and are running their business accordingly.
The conclusion of their consideration is that there is no imminent danger from AI.
You can’t assume that the danger from AI is so definitely true that anyone competent who considers it will come out agreeing that there is danger.
Who has given the issue serious consideration? The only example I can think of of someone giving it serious consideration and concluding we don’t need to worry is Robin Hanson, but I really have no idea how to identify, or even estimate the number of people who seriously considered the issue, decided there was nothing to worry about and then went about their lives without mentioning it. Any thoughts on how to approach the question?
It would be special pleading to bring up “Google has seriously considered it” when that is part of “Google has seriously considered it and is hiding it”, yet to not bring that up when it is part of “Google has seriously considered it and has decided it’s nothing to worry about”.
It is of course possible that Google has not considered it at all, but that would apply to Rasputin496′s original suggestion as much as it applies to mine, so mine still would be a more straightforward explanaion than his, even if it’s not the most straightforward explanation on an absolute level.
(If you think I shouldn’t have used the word “most”, but should have said something like “most out of all other explanations that make the same assumptions”, then sure, I’ll accept that.)