It’s a category error, LLMs are text prediction engines. There is nothing behind the curtain, they can’t by evil, because that implies understanding and intent.
LLMs are evil in the way that earthquakes are evil, it is pure anthropomorphism, and it’s taking the focus from were the real issues are.
Don’t get sucked into blaming the hammer, when the one swinging it it right there.
Yeah, I’m not entirely convinced, yet. Sure you’re right and all. But even with the hammer analogy… There’s the one the carpenter uses. And then there’s the warhammer, specially designed to crush skulls. And you’re bound to have a bad time renovating your roof with that thing. So I think the designer already left some intent in the technology. And on the other side he have what things get used for. I think I’d be willing to attribute evilness to technology if it’s solely for evil purposes. Like certain kinds of land mines or devices to torture people.
Other than that, you’re certainly right. Most tech is at least dual-use. Or neutral and can be used for arbitrary good and evil tasks. I bet this is the case with AI, like other computer tech and automation. And with that it’s down to the humans who use it as a tool.
Question remains if that’s a useful argument in practice. When talking about dystopian science fiction, I’m always a bit unsure about the interplay of the people in power, the technology and society. Is it the people who use technology to oppress the other people? Or did the existence of the technology get them into the position of power in the first place, enabling the dystopian society?
And I’m sure we’ll give AI power to make decisions. We already let algorithms shape our information, lives and society. And oftentimes not for the better. And in my eyes it doesn’t really tell us a lot if we say the computer code has no understanding or intent. It’s still going to affect our lives, and it can have agency or autonomy if provided with the power to act in some form. It doesn’t need intent in the sense of a conscious human being for that. (But that’s not exclusive to AI. A more traditional business process might also decline someone’s loan or medical treatment and ruin their life. Or approve the military bomb someone.)
I don’t disagree, but my point is.
It’s a category error, LLMs are text prediction engines. There is nothing behind the curtain, they can’t by evil, because that implies understanding and intent.
LLMs are evil in the way that earthquakes are evil, it is pure anthropomorphism, and it’s taking the focus from were the real issues are.
Don’t get sucked into blaming the hammer, when the one swinging it it right there.
Yeah, I’m not entirely convinced, yet. Sure you’re right and all. But even with the hammer analogy… There’s the one the carpenter uses. And then there’s the warhammer, specially designed to crush skulls. And you’re bound to have a bad time renovating your roof with that thing. So I think the designer already left some intent in the technology. And on the other side he have what things get used for. I think I’d be willing to attribute evilness to technology if it’s solely for evil purposes. Like certain kinds of land mines or devices to torture people.
Other than that, you’re certainly right. Most tech is at least dual-use. Or neutral and can be used for arbitrary good and evil tasks. I bet this is the case with AI, like other computer tech and automation. And with that it’s down to the humans who use it as a tool.
Question remains if that’s a useful argument in practice. When talking about dystopian science fiction, I’m always a bit unsure about the interplay of the people in power, the technology and society. Is it the people who use technology to oppress the other people? Or did the existence of the technology get them into the position of power in the first place, enabling the dystopian society?
And I’m sure we’ll give AI power to make decisions. We already let algorithms shape our information, lives and society. And oftentimes not for the better. And in my eyes it doesn’t really tell us a lot if we say the computer code has no understanding or intent. It’s still going to affect our lives, and it can have agency or autonomy if provided with the power to act in some form. It doesn’t need intent in the sense of a conscious human being for that. (But that’s not exclusive to AI. A more traditional business process might also decline someone’s loan or medical treatment and ruin their life. Or approve the military bomb someone.)