Monday, May 20, 2024
Latest:

Similar Posts

45 thoughts on “CEO Naval Ravikat Says AI Fears Are Overblown | Joe Rogan”

  4. WTF does this idiot know about AI? Not much. He's got a bachelors in CS (and Economics) from Dartmouth. Big wow. LMFAO. Their ranked what, 43rd? And just and undergrad. Oooh, how impressive. I'll never figure out why these ass clowns are given air time.

  5. Thank you. We're solving simple problems using massive amounts of data, it has no parallel with actual independent intelligence. 100% agree.

  8. Killer robots may not be a problem NOW, but I guarantee it will be in 50-100 years. Just because we may not see it in our lifetime, doesn’t mean it’s an issue for our future children.

  17. Joes too Optimistic. The ai expert who looks like Harry Potter said the same thing too. We’re nowhere near where we think ai is gonna be.

  18. This guy is creating a massive straw-man of the entire argument: none of the people I've heard warning about the dangers of AI are talking about AI that is actually conscious, sentient or, for want of a better word, 'alive'. Quite the opposite. All the warnings I've heard about AI are to do with the fact that it's simply software writing itself, altering its own code, and that once that ball starts rolling we have less and less control over it as time goes on, and yet we're trusting weapons systems with this shit. The 'Skynet' scenario is the absolute worst case, there's far more immediate and believable problems than that so it's quite disingenuous to act like that's the sole concern, but even the Skynet scenario is possible without a conscious, sentient, 'alive' AI. If we entrust important WMD systems to an AI (software that writes itself), it's entirely plausible that that software, through pure mathematical calculations, might decide to use those WMDs on us. The AI doesn't have to be 'alive' or 'conscious' to do that.

    In fact, a fully sentient 'alive' AI would probably be less frightening because at least you'd have a chance of reasoning with the thing. With 'software that writes itself' you're totally fucked.

  20. I like how people assume a humans creative thinking is something other than pattern recognition. Ideas do not just magically get created and pop into our heads. Before the idea is formed, there is almost always several steps that lead to said idea.

  22. The amount of rage this guy gets for simply being rational, it’s almost as if someone is threatening the privately held religious beliefs of his detractors.

  24. I think this guy forgot that an ai’s brain is the WHOLE INTERNET which we are giving it more information everyday

  25. As far as storing all the information of the internet, that exists as the network of data centers and storage. No it isn't all within the confines of a single 3lb mass, but it could all be accessed from a single network access point or network card eventually.

  29. Joe Rogan….do you use your right frontal lobe or left to masturbate? ..nav…Oh I use the cellular level of my frontal 5G harmonious cerebral cortex . Joe Rogan…I just brain farted .

  36. This guy is dangerously naive to think having bots putting most people out of work is a good thing. As if all these robotic servants are just given to us for free like some mythical utopia.

    Creative jobs are not the last refuge either. There are already bots that can write music. And even if they couldn't, art will NEVER be a reliable line of work because your income will always be determined by popularity.

  37. What do you mean we don't know how a human brain works? Or we don't have models of brains? I'm pretty sure neither of those is true.

  38. This guy is talking about Socilism being horrific, and all jobs getting automated bar creative ones as a good thing. What are people doing for money? Everyone becomes a vlogger?

  39. Who says it needs to be a human brain? If it is able to develop itself and it has the very basics of creative intelligence/problemsolving needed and also all the information in the world, who says it cannot develop itself into a fullworthy intelligence? We don't start as what we are as adults either. Our brain grows into that. Maybe the inner complexity isn't even necessary to create a "sentient" being created by machinery and not biology.

  40. This is what I was thinking when people said that truck drivers are going to be replaced with AI there are way to meany variables that a computer can’t do. Too meany things that can change in an instance.

  43. I feel like the analogy to use in argument against AI reaching sentience or whatever would be like comparing an AI (as we make and understand them today) to a clock. A clock dosen't tell you the time, even digital ones that speak don't tell you the time. They don't have a concept of what time is, nor that they are communicating that to anyone or anhyhing. A clock purely runs the way it was built. It happens to tell us the time, but as a end result of all it's other functions.

    In the same way, an AI today that can speak or think- isn't really doing any of those things. It just gives the illusion that it is or does. We have all these movies etc that say AI can't feel emotions- but if you define true consciousness and thought as requiring a simulation or recreation of ALL the minute chemical and biological trappings of a brain and neurology, than yes modern AI cannot possibly feel or understand emotion. Just as it cannot truly think or problem solve. AI today is no different than all our machines, which can be compared to complex rube goldberg machines. Just a bunch of built parts tumbling into place the way we designed them to.

  45. He's wrong about the machinery inside the cell contributing significantly to neural intelligence. This is just not consistent with the form and anatomy of brains and nervous systems. All evidence points to brain function being dependent on the synapses and their weights and connections.

Comments are closed.

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com