You can use Aspirin precursors to make heroin. You can use homing algorithms to land an egg [0] or a bomb.
I also want to set all information free, but not everyone will be ethical or responsible with it. Because while the idea (of setting all the information free) is nice, unfortunately the idea involves humans.
Of course not. But here's the thing - if someone deems some information "unsafe", only unethical actors will have it.
Kinda like a beaten (but not solved/agreed upon) gun ownership argument, but on a whole new level, because it's about gun blueprints* now.
___
*) Given a state of modern LLMs, there are high chances that a blueprint from an "unsafe AI" may be for a water gun, miss a chamber altogether, or include some unusual design decisions like having the barrel pointing down towards one's legs.
And thinking about the accuracy... I guess, old farts are having the Anarchist Cookbook moment (colorized) :-)
That's a hard problem, for sure. I'm leaning on the "information shall be free" side, but I also know the possibilities, so I can't take a hard stance for it, just because I don't all have the answers to my questions.
Who decides this? Can we apply laws to thoughts or plans? Should we fund research for making Minority Report a reality or increase "proactive policing"?
How to keep people safe while letting all information free? Can we educate everybody about good/bad, legitimate/nefarious so everybody stays on the same page forever? Shall we instrument this education with drugs to keep people in line like the movie Equilibrium?
Questions, questions...
Certainly not the techbros, even though they're trying their damnest.