Yoshua Bengio

So I think you're putting it right.

There's a big difference between the sort of discussion we ought to have within the AI community

and the sort of discussion that really matter in the general public so i think that the picture of terminator and you know ai loose and killing people and super intelligence that's going to destroy us whatever we try isn't really so useful for the public discussion because i

For the public discussion, the things I believe really matter are the short-term and medium-term very likely negative impacts of AI on society, whether it's from security, like, you know, big brother scenarios with face recognition or killer robots, or the impact on the job market, or concentration of power and discrimination, all kinds of

social issues, which could actually, some of them could really threaten democracy, for example.

Yes, I don't mean, no, that's right.

So I think these short and medium term concerns should be important parts of the public debate.

Now, existential risk for me is a very unlikely consideration, but

still worth academic investigation in the same way that you could say, should we study what could happen if a meteorite came to Earth and destroyed it?

So I think it's very unlikely that this is going to happen or happen in a reasonable future.

It's very...

The sort of scenario of an AI getting loose goes against my understanding of at least current machine learning and current neural nets and so on.

It's not plausible to me.

But of course, I don't have a crystal ball and who knows what AI will be in 50 years from now.

So I think it is worth that scientists study those problems.

It's just not a pressing question as far as I'm concerned.

So the negative is the picture it paints of science is totally wrong.

Science in general and AI in particular.

Science is not happening in some hidden place by some really smart guy.

One person.