Lee Cronin
speaker
545 appearances
2 recordings
1 series
first heard Dec 2023
last heard Jun 2024
Lee Cronin’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
I mean, I think that it's kind of... I think machine learning is going to provide a big chunk of that, right? Because it helps us explain this. So the way I'd say, if you take... That's interesting.
Well, let's just... My favorite one is because the AI doomers are driving me mad. The fact that we don't have any intelligence yet. I call AI autonomous informatics just to make people grumpy. You're saying we're quite far away from AGI. I think that we have no conception of intelligence. And I think that we don't understand how the human brain does what it does.
I think that we are, neuroscience is making great advances, but I think that we have no idea about AGI. So I am a...
technological i guess optimist i believe we should do everything the whole regulation of ai is nonsensical i mean why would you regulate excel other than the fact that clippy should come back and i love excel 97 because we can play um you know we can do the flight flight simulator uh i'm sorry in excel yeah have you not played the flight simulator in excel 97 yeah yeah
It's like wireframe, very, very basic. But basically, I think it's X0, Y0, shift, and it opens up and you can play the fight simulator. Oh, wow. Wait, wait. Is it using Excel? Excel. Excel 97. Okay. I resurrected it the other day and saw Clippy again for the first time in a long time.
I am very frustrated.
I'm very frustrated by the way that we're AI dooming right now. And people are bestowing some kind of magic. Now, let's go back a bit. So you said AGI. Are we far away from AGI? Yes. I do not think we're going to get to AGI anytime soon. I've seen no evidence of it. And the AI doom scenario is nonsensical in the extreme. And the reason why I think it's nonsensical, but it's not...
And I don't think there isn't things we should do and be very worried about, right? I mean, there are things we need to worry about right now, what AI are doing, whether it's fake data, fake users, right? I want authentic people, authentic data. I don't want everything to be faked. And I think it's a really big problem. And I absolutely want to go on the record to say I really worry about that.
What I'm not worried about is that some fictitious entity is going to turn us all to paperclips or detonate nuclear bombs. I don't know. Maybe, I don't know, anything you can't think of. Why is this? I'll take a very simple series of logical arguments. The AI doomers do not have the correct epistemology. They do not understand what knowledge is.
And until we understand what knowledge is, they're not going to get anywhere because they're applying things falsely. So let me give you a very simple argument. People talk about the probability, P-Doom AI. We can work out the probability of an asteroid hitting the planet. Why? Because it's happened before. We know the mechanism.
We know that there's a gravity whirl or that space-time is bent and stuff falls in. We don't know the probability of AGI because we have no mechanism. So let me give you another one, which is like, I'm really worried about AG. What's AG? AG is anti-gravity. One day we could wake up and anti-gravity is discovered. We're all going to die. The atmosphere is going to float away.
We're going to float away. We're all doomed. What is the probability of AG? We don't know because there's no mechanism for AG. Do we worry about it? No. And I don't understand the current...
um reason for these for the for certain people in certain areas to be generating this nonsense i think they're not doing it maliciously i think we're observing the emergence of new religions how religions come because religions are about kind of some control so you've got the optimist saying ai is going to cure us all and ai is going to kill us all what's the reality Well, we don't have AI.
We have really powerful machine learning tools, and they will allow us to do interesting things. And we need to be careful about how we use those tools in terms of manipulating human beings and faking stuff, right? Right.
No, not plus. I don't know. I was seeing on Twitter today various things, but I think Yudkowsky is at 95%.
Maybe. And what are the fees? I think Scott Aronson, I was quite surprised. I saw this online, so it could be wrong. So sorry if it's wrong. It says 2%. But the thing is, if someone said there's a 2% chance you're going to die going into the lift, would you go into the lift? In the elevator for the American English speaking audience. Well, no, not for the elevator.
So I would say anyone higher than 2%, I mean, I think there's a 0% chance of AGI doom.
I think this is, I would fail that argument 100%. Here's a number of reasons to fail it on. First of all, we don't know where the intention comes from. The problem is that people think, they keep, you know, watching all the hucksters online with the prompt engineering and all this stuff.
When I talk to a typical AI computer scientist, they keep talking about the AI as having some kind of decision-making ability. That is a category error. The decision-making ability comes from human beings. We have no understanding of how humans make decisions. We've just been discussing free will for the last half an hour, right? We don't even know what that is.
So the intention, I totally agree with you. People who intend to do bad things can do bad things, and we should not let that risk go. That's totally here and now. I do not want that to happen, and I'm happy to be regulated to make sure that systems I generate, whether they're like computer systems or You know, I'm working on a new project called Chem Machina. Nice. Well done.
Showing 401–420 of 545 · page 21 of 28
← Previous
Next →