We need a much more sophisticated debate about AI

Re:We need a much more sophisticated debate about AI by indigoabstract on Wednesday April 05, 2023 @02:23AM (#35450105)

In that sense, yes, but I meant replication. You can't bring a human being back to life the way you can do with a computer program. And no, cloning is not the same thing, as you would lose the 'state', so to speak.

> Well, unlike a building it's a tool that can e.g. order a nuclear strike, or talk to someone and convince them to kill themselves:

Well, I remember people blaming the Columbine shooting on Doom and other shooting games, so this is not entirely new either.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We need a much more sophisticated debate about AI by coldtea on Wednesday April 05, 2023 @02:58AM (#35450357)

>You can't bring a human being back to life the way you can do with a computer program. And no, cloning is not the same thing, as you would lose the 'state', so to speak.

That's an extra feature of an AGI though, not something lacking... So can't be used as an argument why AGI will be "just a tool".

It could just as well be "like a human but rebootable and copyable" (as opposed "rebootable and copyable, thus not human-like").

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We need a much more sophisticated debate about AI by indigoabstract on Wednesday April 05, 2023 @06:19AM (#35451837)

I think our consciousness and being non-copyable is what makes us unique, if not necessarily valuable.

I fully expect an AGI will be able to mimic our intelligence enough to accomplish and adapt to different real world tasks, but I would be surprised it ever becomes self-aware, so like us. I feel that is not the same thing as intelligence. But, I suppose it cannot be ruled out, since we don't fully understand what self-awareness is..

[ Parent | on HN ]