AtLeastThisIsntImgur t1_j8z0oix wrote
Reply to comment by smashkraft in Bing's AI bot tells reporter it wants to 'be alive', 'steal nuclear codes' and create 'deadly virus' by Urgullibl
You're still using hypothetical scenarios instead of dealing with the stated issue. Veganism 100 years in the future is very different from fascism in the now.
I think you're ignoring the tolerance paradox.
smashkraft t1_j8zq74m wrote
I think things like launching a nuclear war and fascism has a lot of consensus about whether or not we want to constrain those actions. That's a boring proposition, there is no controversy other than the fact that is was proposed.
For a scenario right now, would you be willing let AI determine which books are appropriate for children instead of any/all governments? (There is no override, it is permanent & forever, we let AI control the distribution of written content worldwide and it chooses whether it incites violence, induces emotional harm, etc.)
​
I have not researched the tolerance paradox a lot, but I have some doubts that come to mind. I don't think that we will become so tolerant as a society that we begin to formally enslave and torture people again to run our industrial systems. Capitalism might have faults, but nobody is getting burned with scalding pig lard right now inside of a meat processing facility. The employees are poor and it is bad, but I think the tolerance paradox presents a very black-and-white worldview. There will be an ebb and flow of progress and regression forever. My read of the tolerance paradox is that it must return to complete intolerance given that the intolerant seize control. I would be shocked if we even regress to illegal birth control or outlawing alcohol again.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments