In 6,000-word essay Microsoft co-founder also expresses concern governments not prepared for technology’s impact

I’ve started calling this domain human reserved. I like the phrase human reserved because it makes me think of nature reserves – places where we could put buildings and roads, but we choose not to because the loss would be too great.

  • subarctictundra@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
    71·
    2 days ago

    After the attacks of 9/11 the US government went through its biggest reorganisation since World War II for the purpose of improving just one function, national security. AI will require much, much more. It will affect national security as well as employment, education, taxation, energy, elections, air and water, public health, the financial system, law enforcement, transportation, …

    They’re telling us to change our systems, yet it’s as a responce to a change they themselves brought about. Just think of how much public money could have been saved if they had just refrained from developing AI in the first place. People’s jobs are getting automated and they are getting asked to pay for the privilige

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      71·
      2 days ago

      Not developing AI. We’ve been working on and with ANI for a very long time, and constant research on what might make AGI possible. What side railed everything is some companies found out they can do lots of amazing things with LLMs, a subset of AI science, and investors will pay them to make better versions. They talk a lot about how what they’re doing will lead to AGI, but these people (or the scientists doing the actual work) know better than that. LLMs can possibly be part of what AGI uses, but it’s on the wrong branch. And they’ve given up following the other branches because this one is paying off.

      So in short, we could have done better (both ethically and core results), but once again money got in the way.