Professor Joanna Bryson | This House Believes Artificial Intelligence Is An Existential Threat | CUS

[@Gothmog2266]

If i hear one more person trot out the Budapest Memorandum without having the slightest clue about the actual obligations of its signatories, I'm going to lose it. The UK and US did not guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty if it gave up its nukes. We committed to seeking action at the UNSC. That is a VERY different thing.

[@dariak8345]

The only thing I can really agree with is this: People working in these companies, developing these tools, rather than being responsible and making sure their product is safe before they release them, are deliberately trying to make things that can pass liability to, and they're trying to fool lawmakers into thinking that liability should be held by the device.

[@danremenyi1179]

Oh Dear Oh Dear. Poor Cambridge.

[@gbrsjones11]

totally agree, Bryson is a joke. She sees issues from an academic, the chattering class, british imperialist, colonialist, bubble. Brexit was and is a good thing. The top brass of the EU parliament are Not directly democratically elected by the european citizens ! It's an authoritarian dictatorship. And instead of building bridges to the two largest powers in the world, Russia and China, she's a neocon Americanised old fashioned old world order colonialist. Alienated from 80% of the World. The 80% who steer away from their old colonialist, oppressive overlords, to embrace Russia and China, because theirs is the New World, the multilateral world, BRICS plus forty four more nations wanting to join it. And if we would only embrace this new world order, the multilateral order, that is emerging, as equal business partners, instead of fighting it, we would be ten times better off. Our political class and by the looks of it the academic class here, is trying to hold on to the old colonialist, we are better, we have to rule the world, mindset. But we must share the world, with Russia and China and Accept that premise, or face another stupid, archaic dinosaur colonialist, we are better and exceptional, mindset, world war. All people in the world a equal, the indigenous Celts, Anglo Saxon, caucasian, Brits are no better than indigenous Africans, Chinese or Russians. And no peoples can rule the world as an overlord. But that is what the American and British caucasian anglo saxons, always want to do, just can't get that archaic thinking out of their heads, as Bryson clearly demonstrates.

[@bricology]

She is very poor at argumentation, and an embarrassment to Americans. And anyone who rhetorically asks "right?" at the end of every sentence is both annoying and displaying poor thinking.

[@singingway]

"apply ordinary product law to digital products" is a remedy she suggests at 12:00

[@kuakilyissombroguwi]

This is precisely why humanity is already doomed and unprepared for the world AGI controlled by huge tech companies will bring about. In one word: hubris. The human ego takes the L, yet again...

[@Anna_Swamy_Nageshwar]

Existential Threat in human thinking not in algorithm itself.

[@charleslongshanks]

Very poor arguements badly put. Especially dragging in party politics and gender. When ai self generates, such basic human concerns and concepts are surely low on its 'agenda'. I probably could put this better but I'm about to go to sleep🙂please think on higher levels of consciousness in regard to ai

[@ikotsus2448]

Finally, a cohesive talk, without referencing personal agendas, 100% relevant to the topic, with thorough, logical arguments and deep a understanding of the issue. "Wikipedia has access to all the libraries in the world, it is not taking over the world". The nuance in this statement is on another level. I am using this argument anytime somebody speaks about AI's existential risk.

[@magnuskarlsson8655]

That is a ridiculous argument. Wikipedia is not "taking over the world" because it doesn't have artificial intelligence, it's not even remotely close to being "intelligent" in the way GPT-4 is "intelligent" or agentic/purposive. This should be fairly obvious. And now, in the last few weeks, news has come out that companies are pouring billions into creating actual agentic AI. To quote Eliezer Youdkowsky: we are already dead, we just don't know it yet.

[@gw4273]

100% relevant, except for the Trump smearing...totally unnecessary, smh.

[@tarek7451]

Hawking said this, I talked to Jaan Tallinn at the dinner table, G7 is worrying about this, blah, blah, blah. A typical argument from authority.

[@j2bryson]

Er, actually argued AGAINST what Hawking said (rather than from his authority!), but admit that WAY more than usual used all the classic rhetorical tricks (as well as making I hope good arguments.) I think it because I was actually taught those tricks in the same high school "speech" class where I'd had my only previous experience of formal debate.

[@cmdr.o7]

this was the weakest talk i've seen in a long while, completely smeared in politics, assumptions and agendas academia is clearly dead.. and no they did not all watch 'Wargames' feel bad for Connor having to listen to this, but he seem to be enjoying himself, so i'd trust llama2 over this 'professor' with the nuclear codes honestly x)

[@AlexIncarnate911]

Complete waste of time. The best arguments were made by Connor

[@lordsneed9418]

To be fair connor didn't do a good job either compared to other appearances I;'ve seen of him. It seemed like he really wanted to give a good "cambridge speech performance" when he should have just talked like he normally does in podcasts and made his arguments more clearly. I thought his appearance on bankless where he started generally talking about technological progress existential risk first to be the most convincing.

[@gw4273]

"Shooting" Trump!?...what an absolutely irresposible thing to suggest, even in a figure. 😠

[@dialgapalkia]

Weak and incoherent. Better to leave AI safety to the Engineers who deploy the products who are trained professionally in providing accurate and comprehensive risk analyses and safety measures. You know, like any other serious industries. I don’t understand how the field has become so saturated with these pseudophilosophers who are then considered experts. Very strange.

[@gw4273]

@6:06 What a nasty cheap shot. So unnecessary to insult Trump & the millions who will vote for Trump in 2024...smh.