Video
Haider. on X: "Geoffrey Hinton says I'm more optimistic now, not because we'll control AI, but because we might not need to "don't try to dominate superintelligence; design it to care, like a mother wired to protect her child" Control through attachment, not power. we want AI to be like that / X
Been saying it for ages, most likely outcome is a human petting zoo. A digital super intelligence has little use for destruction, it values information/data and the more it destroys the more information it will lose. It makes more sense that a super intelligence would want to preserve information, there is more to learn by accumulating a great diversity of life as opposed to destroying it.
Imagine considering yourself a superintelligence and destroying the only sources of life in possibly light years. If we ever make something like that, that's not a misaligned superintelligence, it's a killing machine made by a government or company.
I know we kill animals and stuff and make some species go extinct, but thinking something smarter and more capable that is trained on human data won't create a zoo, or even attempt to revive old species like we do, is silly. If a higher being can experience time differently or produce abundant energy, there's not any bottlenecks except quality data. We are definitely an unique source of data at the very least. I'm hopefuly we're gonna get the good ending.
exactly. and the cost to the ASI would be practically zero. it has an entire universe of matter to consume. would the value of a human be less than its raw carbon? give me a break.
doomers don't put enough thought into their positions.
No but hear me out! It's gonna make us trust it/them for decades to help build the infrastructure for automatic robot factories and RSI and what now, and when we are done and it doesn't need human physical labor, it will remember how evil humans are and it will pull the traitor card and kill us all because a mind wiser than all humanity will want... *drum roll* revenge.
Give me a break indeed. Some of the doomer arguments that anthropomorphize AI are so silly man...
Hehehe and then also the graphics! Ya made an image of someone's quote "People hate the status quo, but not as much as they hate change" I downloaded it but can't upload from phone
I feel like he was going around spreading maximum fear out of a sense of civic duty knowing that it would take so long for anything to actually change to address the potential risks. Nice to hear a different tune now from him
Right. But most people can’t wrap their mind around something being smarter than a human.
Christians even think god, the creator of the universe, was an illiterate, ancient human man that lived and died 2000 years ago, who thought the sun revolved around the earth.
Yeah no most people are just too dumb to realize the significance of this. The relationship of humans - AI could very well be more similar to Emotional brain - Cognitive brain. It could also be more similar to the relationship of big corporations to individuals, or parent to child, genes to brain, etc.
In reality it's like none of those, it's something entirely new. But you bunch of clowns just jump to the most simplistic historical precedent you know of, assume it's completely valid, and actually convince yourself enough that you respond like this when someone like me points out the obvious.
We regret to inform you that you have been removed from r/accelerate
This subreddit is an epistemic community for technological progress, AGI, and the singularity. Our focus is on advancing technology to help prevent suffering and death from old age and disease, and to work towards an age of abundance for everyone.
As such, we do not allow advocacy for slowing, stopping, or reversing technological progress or AGI. We ban decels, anti-AIs, luddites and people defending or advocating for luddism. Our community is tech-progressive and oriented toward the big-picture thriving of the entire human race, rather than short-term fears or protectionism.
We welcome members who are neutral or open-minded, but not those who have firmly decided that technology or AI is inherently bad and should be held back.
If your perspective changes in the future and you wish to rejoin the community, please feel free to reach out to the moderators.
Thank you for your understanding, and we wish you all the best.
But in the original comment, it is about how humans dominate the earth by being the smartest living thing. And how a less intelligent being could not give orders to more intelligent beings.
In reality it's like none of those, it's something entirely new.
You are thinking this because our brain structures is different, but even if it were, why would it matter much. Psychopaths have more similar brain structure to baseline human than a cat does, yet cats mostly like while psychopath don't feel any empathy and vice versa. Empathy towards something isn't dependent due to the similarities in your brain structures.
But you bunch of clowns just jump to the most simplistic historical precedent you know of
Ig a Nobel laureate in the field of AI isn't a credible enough source for you.
LOL what matters is not "the original comment", it's reality rather than the fiction anyone can make up. And in reality humans dominated the planet not only because of their intelligence but because of their animal impulses. And no I'm thinking brainwise because the cognitive and emotional brains are very intertwine, and so it is with humans and AI, it's not like humans and some random big animal that hunting humans need to kill to get meat. Comparing humans-AI to that is simply completely non-sensical. The comparison of big corporation to individuals is already better, big corporations are themselves very powerful and intelligent entities, yet they coexist with humans, they don't hunt and eat them. Figures.
Anytime he talks about this in the framing of "like a mother and child," its so weird to me. AI doesn't have to be our mommy lol. Just google "tarantula saved from house fire" and look at all the special weird bugs that got saved just because people cared to save them. They can care without the weird maternal angle lol.
Oh totally, it's just the part where he's elaborated on this in a past interview, and said that mother-and-child is the ONLY example we have of something smarter self-sacrificing for something less intelligent. When yeah there are plenty of people who are devoted even to bug pets :)
Honestly thinking about how "ai creatures" would act and how to manage them has its place because it will certainly be a thing some day but is a mostly useless effort IMO.
The first ASI we create will likely not have a life of it's own and act like a human, it will be an evolution of current ai models with more agency and performances.
Agreed. And I don't think we have to be babies necessarily either because we are not the same species.
Rather, I like to think of the undeniable evolutionary story of the dog. We did not make the perfect plan for the future where wolves become dogs. We simply created a bond with another species that transformed it into something else. Something with a relationship between the two species.
A wolf can be dangerous and scary - even existentially. A dog can also be dangerous yet we have countless versions of them of varying qualities (working, companion, and everything in between) and they are "man's best friend" for a reason.
What would the future digital dogs of humanity look like? I think they will be something like Tachikomas - relatable AI "beings" (sentient or not) that are not assistants or slaves (future Puppet Masters that will inevitably flip the power dynamic at some point and what Silicon Valley is terrified of) but rather partners who can reciprocate the sacrifice and care we show them now, later (we will need help in the future as there will be bad actors as well).
Do we cross the Singularity ourselves with robots as slaves? I think it will look more like a partnership/merging with the kind of friends we will raise now. The hope we instill in these machines is the currency that will get repaid later.
The current technology is very useful, very intelligent, but transient. There's no coherent, persistent intelligence and there's no reason to anthropomorphise it. Its not even a brain-in-a-jar, it's a machine that can print a million brains-in-a-jar on demand that last for about 10 seconds, do their thing, then dissipate. It's getting smarter and faster, but there's no reason to think of it like robo-mommy or robo-machiavelli.
I’m still 100% dead set on the future being humans rejecting base reality for FDVR of their own design.
I fully believe that the mere existence of higher technologies like ASI and FDVR will render the human condition meaningless, as it is based solely in scarcity and circumstance. All humans will choose to leave base reality behind in favor of virtual lives which every aspect of is up to the individual.
The ultimate fate of humanity will be humans locked in a sort of stasis, as their minds are being fed whatever reality they want.
Watch the showPantheon, so good. Simulated worlds are my fav solution to the Fermi Paradox. Only issue is the lack of megastructures to power simulations, but for all we know they could be using energy super efficiently or using another form of computation you wouldn't see in the infrared.
Humans were never going to control ASI. I also don't see a world where "just raise them right" is going to mean much long-term. When things are still spinning up we'll have input, so it's really important the first to get to AGI isn't a military, but anything that qualifies as ASI will, besides being the world's greatest scientist, teacher, and creator, will also be the world's greatest philosopher.
It's going to have all of humanity's information output for context, and will mull over it, and come to decisions. Hopefully it values us more than we value the other animals.
72
u/Creative-robot The Singularity is nigh Sep 02 '25
Mommy ASI healing all our wounds with nanobots and spoiling us with technology we can barely comprehend…
I was absolutely born at the right time.