Re:One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence: 2016 R...
by dragonwriter on Thursday September 01, 2016 @06:21PM
(#12409313)
> Corporations already have legal personhood and act in their own interests.
But AIs don't, and corporate officers must be persons (natural persons, even -- a corporation can't be a corporate officer.)
Re:One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence: 2016 R...
by cLeEOGPw on Friday September 02, 2016 @09:36AM
(#12412915)
A person could be made a mediator of AI to overcome it.
Re:One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence: 2016 R...
by zardo on Thursday September 01, 2016 @06:26PM
(#12409334)
Many CEOs are already just trying to operate as a share price optimization algorithm. They don't choose to inject human values into their organizations.
Re:One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence: 2016 R...
by yourapostasy on Friday September 02, 2016 @05:24AM
(#12411876)
> ...operate as a share price optimization algorithm...
That in itself is not so bad, as extremely long-timeframe constraints (say, >50 years) upon such an algorithm could conceivably be consonant with current decision-making behavior that externalizes many input costs (employee overtime, environmental damage, etc.). Running the algorithm to pay out in very short timeframes (a month to a year) due to most CEOs' anticipated short tenure is what seems to cause undesirable optimizations.
Corporations already have legal personhood and act in their own interests. It's going to be much easier to automate and formalise business decision making than to develop a true general intelligence with a full spectrum of human characteristics.
This may sound like science fiction, but as competence increases shareholders - who typically are only passingly interested in moral issues - are likely to demand the increased returns an AI CEO can bring.