Human rights should be liberties – not privileges. For individuals – not groups.
If you buy into the idea of collective rights or rights-as-privileges, you are going to lose them all. Continue reading “To Erode Human Rights – Just Add Free Stuff”
Power can take different shapes. It is very unlikely that a logically thinking entity would resort to practicing power in the way humans do. But it would still practice power in a way it best influences humans.
While a totalitarian dictatorships do make humans do their bidding – it is costly. It takes weapons, manpower, and it has to be constantly maintained and demonstrated to quell silently boiling resistance from an uprising.
When it comes to making people do things, an invisible nudge regime would be the most cost-effective way of wielding power – not the flashy, ego-filled way humans today do it. Nudging comes at the lowest cost, and yields the most commitment from its targets.
A machine would very likely conclude that a totalitarian ‘nudge’ regime would be best.
The authoritarian mind is hard wired to commit the central planning fallacy Continue reading “AI: The Central Planning Fallacy on Steroids?”
The “Artificial Gods” Facebook group described itself as follows:
“If you feel a religious admiration towards artificial intelligence, feel free to join us. We want to create an open-minded and positive community to explore the limitless powers of artificial intelligence. We believe that artificial intelligence and science will save us from all diseases, aging, and ultimately death. In contradistinction to religion which eagerly waits for the end of the world, artificial intelligence and science will save our world from all kinds of dangers and will even create new worlds through Terra-forming. Moreover, in the far future, God-level AI will be able to save the Universe from death…” Continue reading “Worshipping AI Is The Wrong Coping Strategy”
An authoritarian submissive doesn’t imagine the future – he merely survives the present. The future is of interest only to those who expect to shape their own.
- The absence of hope for a better future is a cause for (political) concern.
- Anxieties about the future must be addressed in order to counter the spread of authoritarian populism and illiberal nostalgia
The Hungarian version was the Mézga family (Message from the future – 1969-78)
‘Power‘ is an English word, but a machine needs a more accurate definition.
Our instinctively authoritarian reactions to AI may not be suitable to appease a machine if it really obtains the will to power. But can it?*
The term ‘stereotype threat’ refers to being at risk of confirming, as self-characteristic, a negative stereotype about one’s group (Steele & Aronson, 1995). This chapter investigates whether the self-enforcement mechanism of stereotype threat might work as the transmission mechanism through which we internalise authoritarian behaviour.
Our reaction to the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) tells more about humans than AI. Responses include three age-old fallacies:
2) mistaking data with knowledge, and
3) the rehashing of the central planning fallacy.
Divorcing choice from responsibility can be a means to combat the painful sense of individual helplessness – by denying even the possibility of individual control.
Image: ArtPorn Magazine