Excellent interview. I worry, though, that trying to "negative hyperstition" our way out of an AI future leaves all the reasonable people who believe in and are truly committed to the importance of the _human_ getting blindsided by the technology. Whether or not the AI boosters are promoting the tech out of some quasi-theological imperative deep in their subconscious (and I really agree that at least some of them are - Sam Altman freaks me the fuck out, I think he's very dangerous, Andreesen too), that has nothing to do with the technical questions at the heart of "how does this technology work, and how far can it go?" I think the scariest prospect is that AI does become extremely powerful and disruptive - not necessarily in the ways the AI boosters predict, all predictions are wrong and predictions from people with dodgy psychological motivations even more so, but in other ways - and the perspectives that really need to be at the heart of the conversation at that point get ignored, because all the "humanists" (for want of a better term) were predicting the tech would go nowhere, so the people in power decide they don't know what they're talking about and turn towards the hyper-utilitarians / Landians / etc.
I tend to believe that, as a matter of technical facts about the nature of the technology, continuing to pile money and computing power into AI _will_ turn it into something powerful and dangerous, risky for humanness in art and not just in art. But the people who have control over money and computing power are exactly the people who are least likely to be taken in by attempts to 'negative hyperstition' the culture, and are the most prone to boosterism. It sounds like Ewan has some scepticism towards the state, and that's a perspective I have a lot of sympathy towards. But I think trying to influence the state into caring about this technology and paying attention to it - and as a result, hopefully, regulating it - might (maybe, not certainly) be a better bet than trying to convince people it's going to fizzle out, and letting the future of the tech be dictated by the deep-pocketed boosters who are beyond convincing.
I don't know how much of the above is a disagreement with Ewan and how much is just verbal difference, but I wanted it out in the open at least.
Also, totally different point, but the "triune brain" just sounds like Plato's Republic in a trench coat. Threefold division of the mind into the lowest part driven by base appetites, then loyalty and courage and pride, and then the highest part engaged in abstract reasoning?
Yes, well, the situation in the US at the minute is just generally terrifying and adds +70% scariness to all other trends (climate, AI, future of democracy, etc.). I feel comfortable admitting I don't know how to respond properly to it, and I at least have the luxury of not being American.
Would be very nice. Let me know if you've any suggestions for when.
Thank you. Yes, I agree that cautious, intentional engagement is the way forward. But I worry that, like the smartphone, it will change the culture by rotting the brains of everyone else who uses it as a substitute for thinking.
I felt so challenged reading this. My own conern of AI is that we'll reach a tipping point in the future where nothing new has been processed through a human brain. That said, I am part of an artistic community where people are creating work "made by a human". I wish this was an in-person event with a Q&A, I have so many follow up questions 😁
Excellent interview. I worry, though, that trying to "negative hyperstition" our way out of an AI future leaves all the reasonable people who believe in and are truly committed to the importance of the _human_ getting blindsided by the technology. Whether or not the AI boosters are promoting the tech out of some quasi-theological imperative deep in their subconscious (and I really agree that at least some of them are - Sam Altman freaks me the fuck out, I think he's very dangerous, Andreesen too), that has nothing to do with the technical questions at the heart of "how does this technology work, and how far can it go?" I think the scariest prospect is that AI does become extremely powerful and disruptive - not necessarily in the ways the AI boosters predict, all predictions are wrong and predictions from people with dodgy psychological motivations even more so, but in other ways - and the perspectives that really need to be at the heart of the conversation at that point get ignored, because all the "humanists" (for want of a better term) were predicting the tech would go nowhere, so the people in power decide they don't know what they're talking about and turn towards the hyper-utilitarians / Landians / etc.
I tend to believe that, as a matter of technical facts about the nature of the technology, continuing to pile money and computing power into AI _will_ turn it into something powerful and dangerous, risky for humanness in art and not just in art. But the people who have control over money and computing power are exactly the people who are least likely to be taken in by attempts to 'negative hyperstition' the culture, and are the most prone to boosterism. It sounds like Ewan has some scepticism towards the state, and that's a perspective I have a lot of sympathy towards. But I think trying to influence the state into caring about this technology and paying attention to it - and as a result, hopefully, regulating it - might (maybe, not certainly) be a better bet than trying to convince people it's going to fizzle out, and letting the future of the tech be dictated by the deep-pocketed boosters who are beyond convincing.
I don't know how much of the above is a disagreement with Ewan and how much is just verbal difference, but I wanted it out in the open at least.
Also, totally different point, but the "triune brain" just sounds like Plato's Republic in a trench coat. Threefold division of the mind into the lowest part driven by base appetites, then loyalty and courage and pride, and then the highest part engaged in abstract reasoning?
Thank you, Peter.
It's difficult to see how state regulation could happen when the US state is being driven by the same people who are creating/investing AI.
Ha, good point about the Triune brain. It actually looks a bit like Plato's cave 🤯
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alfredo-Moscardini-3/publication/349207200/figure/fig1/AS:1117189201502208@1643370070108/LLUSTRATION-OF-THE-TRIUNE-BRAIN-SOURCE-GOOGLE.jpg
Hopefully we can all meet up to discuss further some time.
Yes, well, the situation in the US at the minute is just generally terrifying and adds +70% scariness to all other trends (climate, AI, future of democracy, etc.). I feel comfortable admitting I don't know how to respond properly to it, and I at least have the luxury of not being American.
Would be very nice. Let me know if you've any suggestions for when.
This was a fascinating read! I have been concerned about AI ever since it all started. And I, too, am afraid that it will reach a tipping point.
A hug part of me wants nothing to do with it, but I think the solution or maybe a small part of the solution lies in this:
“AI has limited uses. As long as we know what the limits are, it's fine.”
Nothing can ever be a substitute for a human brain.
Thank you. Yes, I agree that cautious, intentional engagement is the way forward. But I worry that, like the smartphone, it will change the culture by rotting the brains of everyone else who uses it as a substitute for thinking.
Definitely!
I felt so challenged reading this. My own conern of AI is that we'll reach a tipping point in the future where nothing new has been processed through a human brain. That said, I am part of an artistic community where people are creating work "made by a human". I wish this was an in-person event with a Q&A, I have so many follow up questions 😁
Hopefully Ewan will be doing more in person events.
Fascinating - and reassuring. (I'm not alone!)
'Strategic decelerationist' - I think that's a t-shirt I could wear.
By the way, things don't get fixed well to the south of Sauchiehall St. I'm in Somerset. It's comparable.
Thank you, yes let’s make this T-shirt!