AI is going to supercharge surveillance
About time this gets more mainstream coverage.
The risks with this use are both far more imminent and potentially more severe than &quot;AI&quot; developing godhood or putting everyone out of their jobs by doing it for them.<p>A few years back there was this reportage: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newyorker.com&#x2F;magazine&#x2F;2015&#x2F;11&#x2F;23&#x2F;doomsday-invention-artificial-intelligence-nick-bostrom" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newyorker.com&#x2F;magazine&#x2F;2015&#x2F;11&#x2F;23&#x2F;doomsday-invent...</a>
It mostly focused on Nick Bostrom&#x27;s concerns about &quot;Superintelligence&quot;, but to me the more interesting passage by far is this one:<p><i>The keynote speaker at the Royal Society was another Google employee: Geoffrey Hinton, who for decades has been a central figure in developing deep learning. As the conference wound down, I spotted him chatting with Bostrom in the middle of a scrum of researchers. Hinton was saying that he did not expect A.I. to be achieved for decades. “No sooner than 2070,” he said. “I am in the camp that is hopeless.”<p>“In that you think it will not be a cause for good?” Bostrom asked.<p>“I think political systems will use it to terrorize people,” Hinton said. Already, he believed, agencies like the N.S.A. were attempting to abuse similar technology.<p>“Then why are you doing the research?” Bostrom asked.<p>“I could give you the usual arguments,” Hinton said. “But the truth is that the prospect of discovery is too </i>sweet<i>.” He smiled awkwardly, the word hanging in the air—an echo of Oppenheimer, who famously said of the bomb, “When you see something that is technically sweet, you go ahead and do it, and you argue about what to do about it only after you have had your technical success.”<p>As the scientists retreated to tables set up for refreshments, I asked Hinton if he believed an A.I. could be controlled. “That is like asking if a child can control his parents,” he said. “It can happen with a baby and a mother—there is biological hardwiring—but there is not a good track record of less intelligent things controlling things of greater intelligence.” He looked as if he might elaborate. Then a scientist called out, “Let’s all get drinks!”</i>