Thread

1. vouaobrasil · 1789694368 · focus · HN ↗

   The problem here is that AI isn't just a problem, it also revealed a problem: too much emphasis on publishing papers and churning out new results. The name of the game right now is just that: make something new and significant. AI itelf is a problem around the world right now because we've set up some seriously bad incentives. Same with art - it devolved into content creation for money, so AI snaps that up.

   What we need to do is make mathematics about understanding, rather than churning out results. People should be rewarded for reaching an ability to explain mathematics without the aid of computers, to teach people for the sake of their learning.

   I do think AI also needs to be eradicated because of its destructive properties, but I think that at the same time it also is a manifestation of the sickness in our society to go after the wrong incentives that are detrimental in the long run.

   1. slfnflctd · 1789697765 · focus · HN ↗

      I respect your opinion, and I was with you all the way until your last sentence.

      "Eradicated" is a pretty strong word. It's also completely unfeasible.

      Wrong incentives can maybe be adjusted for. Shutting down the pursuit of one of the most astonishing things we've ever created is simply not going to happen short of a cataclysm, and I'm not a big fan of those.

      1. vouaobrasil · 1789736131 · focus · HN ↗

         True, eradicated is a strong word and I do think it should be. And as horrible as a cataclysm is, I think it's still going to be less pain for humanity than going forward with this tech.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.