Machine intelligence, part 2

Re:Machine intelligence, part 2 by mgpc on Monday March 02, 2015 @07:36PM (#9135422)

I think @sama's plan isn't very likely to work. Once strong AI is possible, there's no regulatory structure that will keep the genie in the bottle for a meaningful amount of time.

The only path I see with some prospect of success is to limit the total amount of computation available on Earth. (Basically like Vinge's slow zone). If we could engineer a pause in Moore's Law at just the right point, it would buy us time. Maybe we should put a drastic tax on computation at some stage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Machine intelligence, part 2 by pgodzin on Monday March 02, 2015 @08:16PM (#9135548)

Are you suggesting that's what we should do in the face of this potential threat?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Machine intelligence, part 2 by mgpc on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:18AM (#9143361)

If we a seriously believe AI is an extinction level risk, and getting there more slowly might improve our chances, then it seems like we should try anything with a good chance of working. I think this has a better chance of working than regulating AI research itself, since chip manufacturing is centralized and highly visible, whereas AI research could be advanced in secret by a few people in a room. Much easier to successfully regulate the former than the latter.

[ Parent | on HN ]