• Cherry@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Yes. I just think the concept is more imagined as a sentient entity making an error rather than overconfidence or incompetence with the tool at hand.

    And of course we all know it will be used as a scapegoat regardless. Question is what’s the magic number of humans lost to confidence in the machine ratio, before pushback occurs. It sounds horrific even typing it.

    • MangoCats@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      a sentient entity making an error

      The popular fictional scenario is the sentient entity not making an error, but making a rational well informed correct assessment - from its non-human perspective. How much power you allow such entities to have is a very real concern. Not that we have seen such entities in operation, yet.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      I don’t think it’s about number of people I think it’s about perceived sense of urgency on the part of various governments. A lot of people aren’t very happy with AI but the threats are all existential at the moment. The moment something happens all the people who are already not happy with AI will suddenly have a threat to point to and then the governments around the world will have no choice but to act.

      Although I suspect the Trump administration will still try and weedle out of regulating anything because they have so much business interest in the industry.

      • MangoCats@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        the threats are all existential at the moment.

        I think you mean hypothetical. Possibly hypothetically existential.

        The moment something happens all the people who are already not happy with AI will suddenly have a threat to point to

        and hopefully, that something won’t be an existential threat.