Just add it to the dozens that are already out there. The Fermi Paradox is getting understandable.

Those realities don't just affect the people creating them...

"Oops, did I do that?" Is on the headstone of every rich man who also thought he was a Great Man.

Playing or speaking for God is the greatest Blasphemy.

All too many of the people behind AI are both foolish and reckless, motivated by greed and/or delusions, especially the delusion that if they develop superintelligent AI first, then that godlike AI will out of gratitude help the humans who developed it become immortal and godlike as well. And with that goal in mind, they don't care how much harm AI causes in the meantime.

Idiots.

nt

GODS, how many times are we going to read this and say, "Yeah, that will work out just fine."

Let's show the machines how to kill us and hope they don't decide that we deserve to be killed.

Nice.

Creation of bad viruses or creation beneficial bacteria or even a virus that can specifically target things like cancer cells. Yes it may seem like fantasy but it's coming and fast. As the article states, we're not ready. But then again, in our current state, we're not ready for an already naturally occurring novel virus that is most certainly lurking in areas where humans haven't frequented but could be released as we encroach into these ancient biological ecosystems. Yin Yang certainly applies here.

a 2-way street when it dumbs down users, damages the environment and increases wealth and power inequality. It has very few pluses, nowhere near enough to balance the minuses, and even those pushing AI admit it might destroy humanity.

I can remember artists and record companies, radio screaming that they offered a way to "steal" artists and companies "intellectual" property by enabling people to just buy one album and record 10 copies for their friends. Being able to make mix tapes on top of recording songs directly from radio allowed them to just turn off radio, and the obligatory commercials, and listen to multiple artists in one sitting in a very convenient and often "free" way. You could argue that just having a buddy record an album for you so you wouldn't have to go to the record store and thereby being bypassed the exposure to new and different artists and music could be a form of dumbing people down by limiting their exposure to new things. After all, that's pre-emptively what learning is at it's core.

This is a very crude comparison I admit but my point is every tool that man has invented is a 2 sided sword. I am by no means a fan of AI being used in ANY nefarious manner. I am also one that believes AI is NOWHERE near a thinking machine thats going to become aware and snuff us out.... yet. If anything, like the atomic bomb and the insane things we were going to do with it when we first built them (i.e. putting reactors in airplanes, blasting mines open with them etc.....), we hopefully will learn our lesson (usually the hard way) with AI and corral it, more importantly its nefarious uses, before it can do too much harm. The harm that AI has the potential to do to us is from the people wielding it. The great good and advancement that it has is from the people wielding it. It's not from AI itself. I like baseball unless someone uses a bat to beat someone else.

Every example above one can point to incredible GOOD things that came out of those tools, from PC's (Cassette tapes brought the home PC into being as the original hard drive), the myriad of medical and other very helpful things that came from a massively destructive device like the bomb. Once again crude examples but I think they get across my thought process here.

I think of it like the beginning of 2001 A Space Odyssey, when the first primitive human picked up a bone and smashed another one.
WE are the problem, or the solution, not the TOOL.

Respectfully

I'm on my third antibiotic in just over a year because the Lyme disease that I have has become resistant to them. Last time at the doctor I asked how many more antibiotics there were for us to use before it is resistant to them all and he said he would look it up for me. This part was pertinent to what I am talking about "and several succeeded in killing bacteria that had evolved resistance to natural bacteriophages." I hate most AI. I hate AI pics, videos, music, books, but the part that creates something that kills bacteria that has evolved resistance, that part I don't. I agree it is a 2 way street and it is being used for worthless, stupid and bad things and we should stop doing that. But for medicine? I think it is good.

As valid a solution to the Fermi Paradox as any.

I'd even say 99% of the time it's the solution (I'm no scientist obviously lol). Just from looking at ourselves I'd say thats the biggest reason there aren't rockets flying around every solar system with a Goldilocks planet. Its very hard for intelligence to progress beyond a certain technological level. I buy that 100%

Then tell it what you want and viola! It's all a matter of computing power. Ginormous server farms. And the waste of ginormous amounts of electricity. And this is the tip of the nefarious iceberg.

Time for a Butlerian Jihad? Maybe. As Barney Fife use to say....nip it. Nip it in the bud.

There should be a law.that when these AI generated viruses are created they need create a vaccine along with it.
This is like going to war without an exit plan, more deaths without a way to stop it

From the TV show The Peripheral. It's really too bad it didn't get a second season

I guess I'll have to go out and get the books. I thought the first season was pretty spectacular.

Since dumpie & Muskrat like to kill cancer research funds, how much of that money now sits in
their pockets?

Someone will give AI the task of doing just that.
Welcome to Raccoon City.

Since virus' were considered to neither be "dead" or "alive" at that time, I questioned if future nanotechnology advances could be used to edit and/or manufacture prions and proteins, creating a new virus.

I'll have to dig it back out. My professor told me it was a dark outlook on future technology, but could he not refute the possibility of such technology being produced. Of course, AI wasn't even in our vocabulary at the time. (At least not in my field of study)

This was 20 years ago. I've always believed that public knowledge of technology will come too late if it is used nefariously on the masses.

Yeah, I know. I've always had a paranoid streak.

So it is happening here and now. So it is happening in infinite places and in infinite time before and after now. So, no need to worry.

They aren't talking about a computer virus.