I often try to understand the forces pushing the world towards AGI development despite the risks. It is clear that there are a bunch of different motives. There are market forces and national security competition, but I wonder to what degree we can attribute AI development to a deep dissatisfaction with the world as it is and a desire to transform it even at the cost of much risk. There is a great deal wrong with the world. But if we focus only on its problems, we may develop a distorted picture of what we are risking. To judge correctly, we also have to notice what is good and worth preserving. If we move forward recklessly, what do we stand to lose? Sunsets, dogs, friends, cookies, and infinitely many other small and precious things. Perhaps, if we cultivate gratitude, we would be less willing to gamble it all away.
Risk-taking is rewarded in business. They don’t always pay off, but the best opportunities come with come levels of risk. It’s a part of the move-fast/break-things motto of the Silicon Valley. Overconfidence is too, and it goes hand-in-hand with risk-taking. Sociopaths thrive in that space.
They’re likely thinking something like, There may be a 20% chance of killing everyone, but not if I do it.
the forces pushing the world towards AGI development despite the risks
humans are tool users. we are slow and weak animals. without our tools we would be extinct. with our tools we dominate the planet. AI is the culmination of a successful strategy. I don't know why people find this so surprising.
Hey! Thank you for your comment. It's an interesting way to frame things. I think humans have many different, competing drives and I don't think that tool use alone explains how we came to dominate the planet. We are good at developing and using tools, but we are also good (at least compared to other animals) at reasoning, anticipating future problems, and delaying gratification to address them. I do not think it was predestined for us to end up where we are today. I don't think it's guaranteed that humanity will move forward with AI development especially if the risks become increasingly apparent and society decides that continuing down this path is not worth the gamble.
I often try to understand the forces pushing the world towards AGI development despite the risks. It is clear that there are a bunch of different motives. There are market forces and national security competition, but I wonder to what degree we can attribute AI development to a deep dissatisfaction with the world as it is and a desire to transform it even at the cost of much risk. There is a great deal wrong with the world. But if we focus only on its problems, we may develop a distorted picture of what we are risking. To judge correctly, we also have to notice what is good and worth preserving. If we move forward recklessly, what do we stand to lose? Sunsets, dogs, friends, cookies, and infinitely many other small and precious things. Perhaps, if we cultivate gratitude, we would be less willing to gamble it all away.