The "AI Menace", which is an increasingly popular topic (see Elon Musk <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/27/elon-musk-artificial-intelligence-ai-biggest-existential-threat> and Stephen Hawking <http://news.discovery.com/tech/robotics/artificial-intelligences-hawkings-fears-stir-debate-141206.htm>) is, and has been for a long time, utterly over-shadowed by the "NI Menace" or natural intelligence menace. Long before an AI takes off and starts "solving the problem" in total disregard for human well-being, we will have natural intelligence "solving the problem" with total disregard for other humans, using artificial intelligence to "solve the problem" of neutralizing the "business risks" from other humans. Indeed, we are already far along that road.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Craig Haynie <[email protected]> wrote: > "I don't like redistribution of income but there won't be any alternative > once jobs disappear." > > You don't know that. People may find unique ways to solve their problems. > > "Pretending that things will just muddle along somehow could be dangerous > as the US has drifted towards becoming a police state in recent years and > economic upheaval that is unprepared for might make things worse." > > I don't believe you can fundamentally make things better by threatening > people with violence. Every time we pass a law and include people in our > plans, who don't want to be included in our plans, we have to threaten them > with violence, or they'll simply opt-out. It's this fundamental shift > towards institutionalized violence which may be creating the police state. > When government is simple, and threatens violence only for fundamental > breeches of security, then we live in a society which has very little > institutionalized violence. The more power the state assumes, in order to > try to solve problems which may not even exist, the more violence it must > incorporate into its very institution. > > Craig > >
