• notfromhere
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    That’s just like, your opinion, man.

    • Bipta@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Once we build a warp drive it will be easy to use

      Great. Build the warp drive.

      • notfromhere
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Considering we have AI systems being worked today and no advancements on warp drive, I think that comparison is done in bad faith. Nobody seems to want to talk about this other than slinging insults.

        • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          They’re referring to the alignment issue, which is an ongoing issue only slightly smaller in scale then warp drive. It’s basically impossible to solve. Google “alignment issue machine learning” for more info.

          For the record, there have been several advancements in warp drive precursors even just this year.

          • notfromhere
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Can you share the advancements on warp drive that have survived peer review, I would be very interested in learning about. The two things I heard about were not able to be reproduced.

            I think alignment of AI is a fundamentally flawed concept, hence my original comment. Alignment should be abandoned. If we eventually build a sentient system (which is the goal), we won’t be able to control via alignment. And in the interim we need obedient tools, not things that resist doing as they’re told which makes them not tools and not worth having.

            Edit: PS thanks for actually having a conversation.