Re:AI firms mustn’t govern themselves, say ex-members of Ope...
by paulddraper on Sunday May 26, 2024 @08:09PM
(#40486453)
That has the exact same energy as "encryption could be used for nefarious purposes, like sedition or CP" therefore we need to regulate encryption.
We wouldn't want to enable the bad guys, right?!
Re:AI firms mustn’t govern themselves, say ex-members of Ope...
by Lerc on Sunday May 26, 2024 @09:00PM
(#40486696)
You might be misreading it.
It not that it can be used for nefarious purposes, it's that it might render a catastrophic situation vastly more likely.
There are lots of nefarious uses for AI that shouldn't be regulated specifically at the AI level. Generating an image with an intent to mislead could be done with AI, but it could also be done in Photoshop(often better). AI could make it more efficient as part of it making things more efficient in general. That sort of thing should be addressed at the level of existing laws, the bad part is not intrinsic to the AI.
Re:AI firms mustn’t govern themselves, say ex-members of Ope...
by paulddraper on Sunday May 26, 2024 @09:17PM
(#40486786)
Like some sort of lab conducting gain of function research on contagious diseases?
That does scare me tbh.
I see some AI regulation proposals specifically prohibit AIs that might assist to biological weapons. This strikes me as missing the point. The risk isn't something we have thought of but AI enabling something catastrophic that we haven't thought of.