tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post8258468038482124484..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: The Real Problems with Artificial Intelligence Sabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger126125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-15015356950290407342019-08-24T07:30:41.668-04:002019-08-24T07:30:41.668-04:00Good. Thanks for your time.Good. Thanks for your time.Dekorrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08531355959677807208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-7092411398621673102019-02-21T10:19:42.365-05:002019-02-21T10:19:42.365-05:00Uh-oh...
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environ...Uh-oh...<br /><br />https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47267081<br /><br /><i>Anudder crisis!</i>R. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10621243868815039607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59744625507566825102019-01-25T18:17:36.914-05:002019-01-25T18:17:36.914-05:00Marnie wrote: Another good article about the state...Marnie wrote: Another good article about the state of "AI"<br /><br />That article talks about the different design approaches for AI, e.g. neural networks, symbolic-based, knowledge-based, Bayesian networks, deep learning. Oddly enough, at the conclusion it didn't even try to guess which approach might dominate in the 2020's. It just says that we might return to an older Steven Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05140374687362624448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32478194910715558562019-01-25T09:52:09.023-05:002019-01-25T09:52:09.023-05:00Another good article about the state of "AI&q...Another good article about the state of "AI":<br /><br />https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612768/we-analyzed-16625-papers-to-figure-out-where-ai-is-headed-next/Marniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10850856778953207810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-76662778623340634092019-01-24T21:39:49.236-05:002019-01-24T21:39:49.236-05:00Castaldo wrote: What is more important than "...Castaldo wrote: What is more important than "overall safety" to me is leaving the moral decisions, within the bounds of specific laws, in the control of the people that will be found liable for those decisions.<br /><br />It's about freedom to make moral decisions, then? According to you, building codes are fine for the sake of overall safety, even though they take away "Steven Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05140374687362624448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-50515564326727000082019-01-24T12:07:13.103-05:002019-01-24T12:07:13.103-05:00@ Dr. Castaldo...
You also stated:
"That is...@ Dr. Castaldo...<br /><br />You also stated:<br /><br /><i>"That is what I'd like to see in laws, and I don't think an AI produced by moral philosophers that reduces the existing distribution of legal decisions to a single point will have any clarity or understandability at all."</i><br /><br />Well, <i>here comes <b>that</b> can of worms now:</i><br /><br />https://R. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10621243868815039607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-55618482882837160352019-01-24T12:00:50.440-05:002019-01-24T12:00:50.440-05:00@ Dr. Castaldo...
You stated:
"I believe so...@ Dr. Castaldo...<br /><br />You stated:<br /><br /><i>"I believe somebody must be found liable because I believe injurious, lethal and property destroying accidents are inevitable, whether situations are decided by machine or person. I also don't believe it makes sense to hold machines liable for moral decisions; and I also believe that holding the government liable doesn't work; itR. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10621243868815039607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2736262347580933032019-01-24T08:59:17.995-05:002019-01-24T08:59:17.995-05:00@Steven Mason says: I want to know what's more...@Steven Mason says: <i>I want to know what's more important than safety.</i><br /><br />I have answered this multiple times, in various forms. So one more try: What is more important than "overall safety" to me is leaving the moral decisions, within the bounds of specific laws, in the control of the people that will be found liable for those decisions.<br /><br />I believe somebody Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-65723215403008864802019-01-23T18:46:43.581-05:002019-01-23T18:46:43.581-05:00@Castaldo
Your comment is full of vim and vigor. ...@Castaldo<br /><br />Your comment is full of vim and vigor. However, you still haven't answered my simple question:<br /><br />In the context of moral options for driverless cars, what is more important than overall safety? <br /><br />You need to write a clear, unambiguous statement and you need to offer at least one real-world example, featuring one of your moral options, that supports yourSteven Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05140374687362624448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-13671707732579854812019-01-23T07:42:42.833-05:002019-01-23T07:42:42.833-05:00@Steven Mason: Now you're just fabricating thi...@Steven Mason: Now you're just fabricating things from my statements. I originally said, <i>The car manufacturers have an incentive to create something like this, to defer liability.</i><br /><br />To defer liability from <i>what?</i> Clearly to any intelligent person this is deferring <i>new</i> liability for their hardware making life-and-death decisions. And I stand by that, this is their Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-40279486167714334642019-01-22T16:20:12.861-05:002019-01-22T16:20:12.861-05:00Castaldo wrote: I am happy to "admit" wh...Castaldo wrote: I am happy to "admit" what I have said all along, safety is one important design consideration.<br /><br />Where did you <i>ever</i> say that before? After I twisted your arm, you said that safety was a misguided goal. After more arm-twisting you said safety isn't your first concern. The <i>closest</i> you came to "admitting" that safety was important was Steven Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05140374687362624448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-39212745189741664382019-01-18T08:20:04.253-05:002019-01-18T08:20:04.253-05:00@Steven Mason: More tiresome bad logic and ad homi...@Steven Mason: More tiresome bad logic and ad hominem attacks. <br /><br />I am happy to "admit" what I have said all along, safety is <b>one</b> important design consideration. <b>But safety for whom?</b> Should I be required to sacrifice my child's life to spare the lives of two stranger's? <br /><br />That is <b>another</b> point you refuse to acknowledge, you insist there isDr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32893093643594383512019-01-17T16:02:11.461-05:002019-01-17T16:02:11.461-05:00Castaldo wrote: YOU believe nothing is more import...Castaldo wrote: YOU believe nothing is more important than safety<br /><br />All bark, no bite. Tell me what's more important than overall safety in the context of moral decisions for driverless cars. In your cover letter for the CV you send to Waymo, make sure you tell them that safety is not your first concern. They need engineers who think outside of the box. <br /><br />Castaldo wrote: Steven Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05140374687362624448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-27468846115996243902019-01-17T12:06:30.638-05:002019-01-17T12:06:30.638-05:00I think the best way to explain some things is wit...I think the best way to explain some things is with stories and fairy tales so in this case we should find related story and everything become clear. And here it is: "The Wizard of Oz". Ingenious twist near the end gives us explanation who is behind the courtain. This is exactly what we should worry about. It is much more probable real Oz will be a bankster rather than cheap Kakazhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05829530658318572788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-23039033275458519912019-01-17T06:09:00.262-05:002019-01-17T06:09:00.262-05:00@Steven Mason says We both know that safety is one...@Steven Mason says <i>We both know that safety is one of the most important design factors for cars,</i><br /><br />No, we don't. That is what I mean by different fundamental beliefs. <b>YOU</b> believe <b>nothing</b> is more important than safety, I've offered you clear evidence that is not how manufacturers design cars, and it is not how consumers choose cars to buy! Sabine discourages Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-16716877143151946942019-01-16T18:33:03.659-05:002019-01-16T18:33:03.659-05:00Castaldo wrote: safety is not my first concern . ....Castaldo wrote: safety is not my first concern . . I do not think [safety] is paramount. <br /><br />I'm gobsmacked. I could ask what is more important than safety in the context of moral options for driverless cars, but any answer you'd offer would be ridiculous. <br /><br />We both know that safety is one of the most important design factors for cars, and trends clearly indicate thatSteven Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05140374687362624448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-6519873925569647352019-01-16T06:24:15.671-05:002019-01-16T06:24:15.671-05:00@Steven Mason: (1) Deferring liability can be defe...@Steven Mason: (1) Deferring liability can be deferring <b>new</b> liability, which is what your plan will impose on manufacturers by making <b>them</b> responsible for accidents due to driving decisions, for which they are not currently responsible. <br /><br />(2) Yes, safety is not my <b>first</b> concern; nor is it the first concern of many when it comes to actually buying cars, because the Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3539343492037091712019-01-15T18:02:00.498-05:002019-01-15T18:02:00.498-05:00@Castaldo
I was going to respond to all of the ir...@Castaldo<br /><br />I was going to respond to all of the irrelevant points in your comment, but then I decided to focus on the two main points derived from your original comment. <br /><br />Here are the two main points: (1) If people are required to customize 50 (or whatever) moral options in driverless cars, will that increase overall safety? (2) Customized cars reduce liability for car Steven Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05140374687362624448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-31185244157627148692019-01-15T14:11:23.131-05:002019-01-15T14:11:23.131-05:00The AI discussion is a collective delusion. See &q...The AI discussion is a collective delusion. See "Industry 4.0". Politics cares about job losses. Why? There was no break through in robotics for decades. Robots are still very bad in, e.g. picking up one rubber ring from a heap of black rubber rings. Musk has learned this painfully. There could be a revolution in administration, because administrators waste their time copying numbers Axelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16130572539759475762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-30709732994560530782019-01-15T08:19:26.194-05:002019-01-15T08:19:26.194-05:00SM says: Even if you think reducing liability for ...SM says: <i>Even if you think reducing liability for car manufacturers is a more important goal, </i><br /><br />As I have already written, and you are ignoring, I don't think I AM reducing liability for car manufacturers, I think I am leaving liability where it already resides, with the driver, or the owner of the robotic driver, which would be the car owner. Currently the driver is Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-72493800954923039952019-01-15T08:19:14.033-05:002019-01-15T08:19:14.033-05:00@Steven Mason, funny I think I have addressed both...@Steven Mason, funny I think I have addressed both of your complaints.<br /><br />First, by analogy, training a neural net to recognize faces doesn't mean all the faces have been recognized. Training a neural net with 50 moral scenarios and a set of MY preferred decisions, so it can generalize a model of what my decisions would be in <b>new</b> moral scenarios, is not "pre-deciding"Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-62237321812134210072019-01-15T00:38:56.463-05:002019-01-15T00:38:56.463-05:00Don’t believe the hype: the media are unwittingly ...Don’t believe the hype: the media are unwittingly selling us an AI fantasy<br />https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/13/dont-believe-the-hype-media-are-selling-us-an-ai-fantasy<br /><br />Marniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10850856778953207810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-40451938703370863742019-01-14T16:43:16.783-05:002019-01-14T16:43:16.783-05:00Castaldo wrote: I think it is a workable idea that...Castaldo wrote: I think it is a workable idea that you incorrectly dismiss out of hand for emotional reasons.<br /><br />I'm not dismissing it out of hand. I've been giving you factual reasons why the idea isn't workable. "Emotional reasons" is just a clumsy ad hominem. <br /><br />Castaldo wrote: The idea is not to pre-decide every moral decisions<br /><br />That's a Steven Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05140374687362624448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-76168212658198092862019-01-14T07:47:07.873-05:002019-01-14T07:47:07.873-05:00@Steven Mason says Do you still think it's a g...@Steven Mason says <i>Do you still think it's a great idea to make car owners decide on 50 moral options?</i><br /><br />I think it is a workable idea that you incorrectly dismiss out of hand for emotional reasons.<br /><br />The idea is not to pre-decide every moral decisions, the idea is to let an artificial intelligence develop a <b><i>model</i></b> of how that individual <b>makes</b> Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-74334751798666632362019-01-13T21:18:00.454-05:002019-01-13T21:18:00.454-05:00Bee says:
"Your computer isn’t like my compu...Bee says:<br /><br /><i>"Your computer isn’t like my computer. Even if you have the same model, even if you run the same software, they’re not the same."</i><br /><br />I'll second that. I completed an A.S. degree in Networking in 2013 and, though I've never worked in the field, I've done a <i>lot</i> of free-lancing. <i>Rarely</i> do I see identical problem/solution R. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10621243868815039607noreply@blogger.com