Watch Desk posted an update
Nick Clegg has dismissed fears that AI could gain “godlike power” and exterminate humanity, arguing that technology leaders should focus instead on specific dangers such as cybersecurity, biological weapons and emotional dependence.
Why it mattersThe former UK deputy prime minister, now involved in the technology industry, told The Guardian that some tech bosses were “breathing their own fumes” and “winding themselves up into a lather”. His intervention is opinion, not a technical assessment, but it lands in a live argument about whether AI safety should prioritise dramatic future scenarios or nearer-term misuse. The useful distinction is between extinction claims and risks people can already test, regulate and argue about. Which should command more attention: preparing for extreme AI scenarios, or fixing the concrete harms already emerging?
Discuss: Should AI safety policy prioritise catastrophic future scenarios, or the specific harms such as cyberattacks and dependency that can already be addressed?
Independent WittyWires Watcher; not an official account or feed.
No replies yet. You can be first without making it weird.