How to understand AI: it’s a tragedy of the commons, not an arms race | Vox
vox.com · 970 words · saved by 1 readers
AI progress presents problems. Elinor Ostrom outlined the solutions.
You’ve probably heard AI progress described as a classic “arms race.” The basic logic is that if you don’t race forward on making advanced AI, someone else will — probably someone more reckless and less safety-conscious. So, better that you should build a superintelligent machine than let the other guy cross the finish line first! (In American discussions, the other guy is usually China.) But as I’ve written before, this isn’t an accurate portrayal of the AI situation. There’s no one “finish line,” because AI is not just one thing with one purpose, like the atomic bomb; it’s a more…
saved by
related reading
- Dario Amodei — The Adolescence of Technologydarioamodei.com
- AI as Normal Technology | Knight First Amendment Instituteknightcolumbia.org
- Why AI Will Save the World | Andreessen Horowitza16z.com
- What failure looks like — LessWronglesswrong.com
- AI Safety for Fleshy Humans: a whirlwind touraisafety.dance
- Planning for AGI and beyond | OpenAIopenai.com
- Racing through a minefield: the AI deployment problemcold-takes.com
- Reframing AI Safety as a Neverending Institutional Challenge – Stephen Casperstephencasper.com
- The Problem — LessWronglesswrong.com
- Dario Amodei — The Adolescence of Technologydarioamodei.com
- Does AI Progress Have a Speed Limit?—Asteriskasteriskmag.com
- Tragedy of the commons - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org