As William has pointed out, AI running amok is already a standard trope. In fact, Asimov invented his three laws way back when as a way of getting past the cliche, and writing stories where it wasn’t a given that the machine would turn on its creator. But the cliche is still alive and well. Asimov himself had the robots taking over in the end, in “That Thou Art Mindful of Him” and the prequels to the “Foundation” trilogy.
The people that the world needs to take FAI seriously are the people working on AI. That’s what, thousands at the most? And surely they have all heard of the issue by now. What is their view on it?
I’ve got the February issue of the IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence lying on my coffee table. Let’s evesdrop on what the professionals are up to
Offline loop investigation for handwriting analysis
Robust Face Recognition via Sparse Representation
Natural Image Statistics and Low-Complexity Feature Selection
An analysis of Ensemble Pruning Techniques Based on Ordered Aggregation
Geometric Mean for Subspace Selection
Semisupervised Learning of Hidden Markov Models via a Homotopy Method
Outlier Detection with the Kernelized Spatial Depth Function
Time Warp Edit Distance with Stiffness Adjustment for Time Series Matching
Framework for Performance Evaluation of Face, Text, and Vehicle Detection and Tracking in Vido: Data, Metrics, and Protocol
Information Geometry for Landmark Shape Analysis: Unifying Shape Representation and Deformation
Principal Angles separate Subject Illumination spaces in YDB and CMU-PIE
High-precision Boundary Length Estimation by Utilizing Gray-Level Information
Statistical Instance-Based Pruning in Ensembles of Independent Classifiers
Camera Displacement via Constrained Minimization of the Algebraic Error
High-Accuracy and Robust Localization of Large Control Markers for Geometric Camera Calibration
These researchers are writing footnotes to Duda and Hart. They are occupying the triple point between numerical methods, applied mathematics, and statistics. It is occassionally lucrative. It paid my wages when I was applying these techniques to look down capability for pulse doppler radar.
The basic architecture of all this research is that the researchers have a monopoly on thinking, mathematics, and writing code and the computers crunch the numbers, both during research and later in a free standing but closed application. There is nothing foomy here.
As William has pointed out, AI running amok is already a standard trope.
As steven0461 has pointed out, this may well make it less likely to be taken seriously.
The people that the world needs to take FAI seriously are the people working on AI.
Knowing about FAI might lead people concerned with existential risk, or more generally futurism or doing the maximally good thing, to become newly interested in AI. (It worked for me.)
Nope, almost no-one in my AI research department has heard of the issue.
Furthermore, in order for people to be funded to do research on FAI, the people who hold the purse strings have to think it is important. Since politicians are elected by Joe public, you have to make Joe public understand.
As William has pointed out, AI running amok is already a standard trope. In fact, Asimov invented his three laws way back when as a way of getting past the cliche, and writing stories where it wasn’t a given that the machine would turn on its creator. But the cliche is still alive and well. Asimov himself had the robots taking over in the end, in “That Thou Art Mindful of Him” and the prequels to the “Foundation” trilogy.
The people that the world needs to take FAI seriously are the people working on AI. That’s what, thousands at the most? And surely they have all heard of the issue by now. What is their view on it?
I’ve got the February issue of the IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence lying on my coffee table. Let’s evesdrop on what the professionals are up to
Offline loop investigation for handwriting analysis
Robust Face Recognition via Sparse Representation
Natural Image Statistics and Low-Complexity Feature Selection
An analysis of Ensemble Pruning Techniques Based on Ordered Aggregation
Geometric Mean for Subspace Selection
Semisupervised Learning of Hidden Markov Models via a Homotopy Method
Outlier Detection with the Kernelized Spatial Depth Function
Time Warp Edit Distance with Stiffness Adjustment for Time Series Matching
Framework for Performance Evaluation of Face, Text, and Vehicle Detection and Tracking in Vido: Data, Metrics, and Protocol
Information Geometry for Landmark Shape Analysis: Unifying Shape Representation and Deformation
Principal Angles separate Subject Illumination spaces in YDB and CMU-PIE
High-precision Boundary Length Estimation by Utilizing Gray-Level Information
Statistical Instance-Based Pruning in Ensembles of Independent Classifiers
Camera Displacement via Constrained Minimization of the Algebraic Error
High-Accuracy and Robust Localization of Large Control Markers for Geometric Camera Calibration
These researchers are writing footnotes to Duda and Hart. They are occupying the triple point between numerical methods, applied mathematics, and statistics. It is occassionally lucrative. It paid my wages when I was applying these techniques to look down capability for pulse doppler radar.
The basic architecture of all this research is that the researchers have a monopoly on thinking, mathematics, and writing code and the computers crunch the numbers, both during research and later in a free standing but closed application. There is nothing foomy here.
As steven0461 has pointed out, this may well make it less likely to be taken seriously.
Knowing about FAI might lead people concerned with existential risk, or more generally futurism or doing the maximally good thing, to become newly interested in AI. (It worked for me.)
Nope, almost no-one in my AI research department has heard of the issue.
Furthermore, in order for people to be funded to do research on FAI, the people who hold the purse strings have to think it is important. Since politicians are elected by Joe public, you have to make Joe public understand.