Is the AI apocalypse a religion in disguise?
By: Ellsworth Toohey (Boing Boing)
A look at some of the hype, false assumptions, and fearmongering driving a lot of influence surrounding AI. The material is delivered as a keynote lecture for 2016 WebCamp Zagreb. (Yes, this is 9 years ago.)
I've provided both a text transcript and a YouTube video. The lecture is 45 minutes long.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
In his talk "Superintelligence: The Idea That Eats Smart People," Maciej Cegłowski takes apart the fear that a self-improving AI will bootstrap itself into a god and wipe out humanity — the Nick Bostrom, paperclip-maximizer scenario beloved in Silicon Valley.
He finds the whole thing "somewhat silly, and full of unwarranted assumptions." Intelligence, he argues, isn't a single dial you can crank; Stephen Hawking, for all his brilliance, still couldn't talk a cat into a carrier. He calls AI doomerism "Religion 2.0," a "nerd Apocalypse" that promises immortality and a God you build yourself. "AI risk is string theory for computer programmers," he writes — "fun to think about, interesting, and completely inaccessible to experiment."
In his talk "Superintelligence: The Idea That Eats Smart People," Maciej Cegłowski takes apart the fear that a self-improving AI will bootstrap itself into a god and wipe out humanity — the Nick Bostrom, paperclip-maximizer scenario beloved in Silicon Valley.
He finds the whole thing "somewhat silly, and full of unwarranted assumptions." Intelligence, he argues, isn't a single dial you can crank; Stephen Hawking, for all his brilliance, still couldn't talk a cat into a carrier. He calls AI doomerism "Religion 2.0," a "nerd Apocalypse" that promises immortality and a God you build yourself. "AI risk is string theory for computer programmers," he writes — "fun to think about, interesting, and completely inaccessible to experiment."
Be a good human. Grossly derogatory comments, blatantly inflammatory comments, excessive trolling, mean-spirited taunting and insults, scamming, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed in compliance with the site's Terms of Service and the Code of Conduct. The moderators have the final word.
Tags
Who is online
90 visitors
Interesting topics presented in a relatable manner. Not everyone's cup of tea.
WOW!!! 13 articles on the Front (Home) Page. Is there an NT award for such prolific productivity? Should NT be renamed "NermTalkers"? Just kdding, Nerm - keep up the good work.
Environmentalism, wokeism, ai apocalypse are all forms of religion. People who are zealots by nature just pick one,
That is a ridiculous generalization. Environmentalism has many forms. Sure there are the traditional tree-huggers whose views are more emotional than rational. But then there are those concerned with the environment based on cause. In particular, carbon-based factors adversely affecting our climate. But also, basic pollution.
It is absurd to declare that environmentalism (implying all forms) is religious rather than based on facts and reason.
Depends on how you define wokeism. There are of course people who go to extremes (e.g. reperations) but wokeism is also used as a pejorative for those who are against discrimination (especially by race). Again you over generalize and lump the reasoned views along with the emotional views.
Some people are clearly overreacting to AI and predicting the end of human civilization. But others are offering reasonable warnings about how AI could be misused and why strong governance is needed to manage its risks responsibly.
AI is an incredible technology that offers an order-of-magnitude improvement in productivity, but this power is also a major liability. Nothing surprising about that.
also used as a pejorative for those who are against discrimination (especially by race).
what woke person opposes discrimination by race?
Depends on how you define ‘woke’. I suspect your definition would only include those with extreme / irrational views. That is the problem with political labels … they encourage broad stereotypes and cultivate inaccurate views of reality.
Yes, I was talking about zealots. There are, of course, environmentalists who are not. But there are also zealots, like those who destroy art in the name the "environment".
hat is the problem with political labels … they encourage broad stereotypes and cultivate inaccurate views of reality.
Sure. They can be abused. Look at how "MAGA "is used on this site. People call Fetterman or Bari Weiss MAGA. But they are necessary,
Okay, then it would be helpful to use adjectives to illustrate that you are talking about a subset and not the entire set of people in the named group.
I use the term 'Trump supporters' to identify those I am referencing clearly.
Here is the Google Search AI Overview:
Trump is such an ism that Trumpism is a standard political term.
You forgot to mention one of the most obvious, Christianity. It's not even bothering to wear a disguise. It's also clearly far more intrusive and invasive than any 'wokeism' or AI religion could ever be.
Because it is actually a religion. Are you not aware of that?
One in which many leftists would like to eradicate, and have it replaced by the cult of liberalism...or the cult of climate change...or the cult of transgenderism.
Where do you get this nonsense? Where do you find 'leftists' wanting to replace Christianity with liberalism? What does that even mean?
Excessively aware. Which is my point. You're clearly inferring a negative context for the other "religions in disguise" claiming they attract "zealots" while seemingly ignoring the actual religions that have been doing the same and worse for centuries.
So, I was simply agreeing that religions attract zealots as clearly shown by the rightwing religious conservatives. Trying to claim the crazy 'zealots' are only attracted to 'wokeism' or 'environmentalism' while the world is fucking drowning in actual religious zealots is just silly.
We are a very long way from a point where AI emerges from an incredibly sophisticated, powerful, useful statistical pattern-matching and pattern-learning mechanism to something that can reason, plot, and act nefariously.
We are, however, already dealing with bad human beings who are using AI for nefarious ends.
But we are on the threshold of tech corporations deploying AI for the sole purpose of exploiting users to obtain financial gain. Profit seeking misuse of AI is a clear and present danger.
Those who own and control AI can force nefarious objectives and rules onto AI. AI is not public infrastructure or a public service. AI is not being developed and deployed for a 'common good'.
I agree.
Correct. The Internet providers are not developing and deploying infrastructure for a 'common good'. Computer manufacturers are not working for a 'common good'. Automobile manufacturers, clothing producers, pharmaceutical companies, banks, financial institutions,... I could go on with examples for hours.
It is only a matter of time. We are at phase 0.
OK, so I am only semi serious. Everyone knows the zombie apocalypse will happen first.