There seem to be two extraordinary claims which lack evidence:
replya) 10% existential risk
b) 0% existential risk
What's the evidence for there being an existential risk? We are provided scenarios which read like science fiction about RSI and ASI right around the corner, resulting in magic sounding technology that can do anything the person making the claim wants it to do, because it can just make itself smart enough in a short amount of time. But the person making the claim has to actually show how such a thing is possible in the real world, not just a story.
replyThe clear and predictable power of AI is the evidence for existential risk. Even if we don't get RSI or ASI, there's a risk we'll automate our world, then it'll break and we'll starve, etc.
reply> The clear and predictable power of AI is the evidence for existential risk
reply* The "predictable power of AI" is very advanced predictive text. What a lot you can do with that, and there are clear limits.
* AI has no intent. The greedheads who find themselves in these positions of power have clear intent (often but not always bordering on and actively becoming misanthropic) put their intentions on AI - hence to doom mongering
* Who will starve with the failure of agriculture? A few, a lot, but not everybody. We are good at this - have been doing it a lot longer than computing or science
(a) is an extraordinary claim, (b) is not an extraordinary claim.
replyThere are very clear and plausible pathways from AI to human extinction level events, regardless of how small you think the probability is.
replySo yes, it very obviously is an extraordinary claim to say there is 0% existential risk.
There are no clear and plausible pathways to human extinction level events that AI makes worse or more likely in any way. It is obviously not an extraordinary claim at all.
replyGood god. You are burden shifting.
a) big claim no evidence. b). says a has no evidence; therefore, I will continue to not let fear manipulate me into believing a claim without evidence.
replyI have a bridge to sell to anyone who believes a big claim without evidence.
B is not a claim that A has no evidence, that's just confused. It's an independent claim that there is 0% risk.
replydeleted
reply