Is A.I. like one of your main worries?
Yes, it's less of a worry than it used to
be mostly due to taking more of a fatalistic
attitude.
So you use to have more hope?
And you gave up some of it and now you don't
worry as much about AI.
You're like this is just what it is.
Yea pretty much.
It's not necessarily bad.
It's definitely going to be outside of human
control.I tried to convince people to slow
down.
Slow down AI.To regulate AI.
This was futile.
I tried for years.
Nobody listened.This seems like a scene in
the movie when the robots are going to takeover.
The merge scenario with AI is the one that
seems probably the best.
If you can't beat it, join it.
But it’s because I agree with his analysis
that A.I. will be used as a weapon that I
disagree with his conclusion that A.I. is
unstoppable.
During the next few minutes I will lay out
to you what I believe is one of the most consequential
theories to ever come from someone speaking
in front of a fake brick wall, and which should
at least cast some doubt upon the likelihood
of an A.I. doomsday, which is to say, if I
am to be so brazen, that in this regard I
believe Elon Musk is wrong.
I believe we are not fated to be eliminated.
You may rightly question my credibility on
this subject because after all I’m not an
A.I. developer, but fundamentally this A.I.
debate is not a question of A.I., but one
of politics, hence why the opinion I’m about
to put forth is not one that is likely to
come from an A.I. developer who is staring
straight into the eyes of God.
Oppenheimer, the inventor of the atomic bomb,
said after it’s first successful denotation,
"Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds",
and yet as a student of politics I can tell
you that the atomic bomb has been the world’s
ultimate peacemaker.
Having a degree of detachment from an invention
can be useful in understanding its societal
implications.
My thesis, which I explored in a previous
talk, is basically that the country that wins
the A.I.
Arms Race will out of national self-interest
stop the continued development of A.I.
We live in the most innovative period in human
history so it may feel like technological
advancement never stops, but for most of human
history technology was stagnant, and sometimes
even retrograding.
Our time period is so remarkably innovative
because of competition.
We are all competing with each other in this
capitalistic game in order to survive and
thrive, which means for a nation to choose
to regulate its A.I. is just plain stupid
because if the United States, for example,
decided to pull back the reigns this would
give China the A.I. advantage, which as Sam
Harris has pointed out, “to be 1 year ahead
in A.I. could mean being ahead 1000 years
technologically.”
So the only way for the A.I. arms race to
come to an end is for there to be a clear
winner.
The winner will then stop the technological
development of artificial general intelligence
because further development would only threaten
their power!
This is not some crazed-conspiracy theory,
but is backed by countless historical examples.
When a corporation becomes a monopoly they
start to consciously and subconsciously halt
innovation because innovation threatens their
dominance over the market.
This is why the greatest innovations tend
to come from startups who are incentivized
to innovate instead of monopolies who are
incentivized to consolidate and close-down.
Countries are currently developing there A.I.
in secrecy, which cannot be stopped no matter
what “agreement” Elon Musk hoped to be
signed because such an agreement would be
too hard to enforce, but this secrecy will
eventually lead to one country developing
a super A.I. that will be able to hack into
any system.
Once this super A.I. is developed it will
be the historical equivalent of the U.S. getting
the nuke in 1945.
In 1945 no one could have stopped the U.S.
from enslaving the world and in 2045 no one
will be able stop the country who has this
super-AI from enslaving the world.
By 1951 the U.S.S.R. detonated its first nuke,
which ushered in the dawn of the Cold War.
The competition between these two superpowers
had the unintended consequence of ushering
in the greatest age of innovation in human
history.
Without the U.S.S.R. the U.S. would never
have put a man on
the moon, but how A.I. will be different from
the nuke is that with the nuke it would have
been nearly impossible for the U.S. to prevent
other nations like the U.S.S.R. from developing
their own arsenal overtime whereas with a
super-AI it will be all-too-easy to prevent
other nations from developing their own super-AI
because a super-AI will be the ultimate international
spy and police.
My A.I. theory is also supported by a deeper
historical trend... muscles => sticks => swords
=> guns => machine guns => nukes.
With each new major advancement of military
technology we have seen a greater centralization
of power… tribes => villages => kingdoms
=> nations => superpowers.
Better weapons = better control.
So my theory… muscles => sticks => swords
=> guns => machine guns => nukes => super-AI.
tribes => villages => kingdoms => nations
=> superpowers => global government.
This super A.I. could hack into every single
country thereby being able to shut down grids,
disarm nukes, and in doing so win WW3 without
ever firing a shot and most alarmingly without
people realizing it for decades or even centuries
after-the-fact.
The threat of power is power in-of-itself.
The nation that unlocks the power of Zeus
will then be the first to push for an A.I.
non-development treaty much like the nations
with the most nukes had pushed for newclear
non-proliferation treaties.
Such a treaty helps to ensure peace, but it
also enshrines power.
National leaders will sign the agreement much
like nations without nukes signed onto non-proliferation
treaties because to not sign it would be futile
and only put them in bad graces with what
will be the most powerful nation ever.
This century, my friends, is thee most consequential
century in all of human history because whichever
nation wins this A.I.
Arms Race will win the world.
So the real question becomes... who do you
think will win this race?
Who do you want to win this race?
I am no fatalist.
I don't believe the future is written.
I believe what we do here, now, determines
our future.
We are the masters of our destiny, but we
better start acting like it before the wrong
nation wins and makes those who wish to live
like victims to live like slaves.
