Why a zero-tolerance policy towards AI?
AI is unacceptable in any case. No matter what.
Most people take a mild or ambivalent stance towards artificial intelligence (AI), even if they think are uncomfortable with it. But if we want to really stop AI, then an ambivalent stance is worse than useless.
The reason many are ambivalent is because they see AI as a tool: we can choose to use it for good or bad, and so we need to be responsible and regulate or restrict the bad parts but keep the good. That sort of perspective works well for a simple technology like the knife: a knife is usually used for good such as cutting food, but always must be treated with respect and care because it can also be dangerous.
Unfortunately, the situation is more complicated with AI. AI is not like a knife. The main reason is that AI crosses the threshold of being too powerful for human beings to handle with their limited wisdom, and therefore, it cannot be controlled. It's already too powerful now and will only become far worse in the future.
Can’t we just regulate it? No, we cannot. With computers becoming more powerful, anyone can use AI and often run their own models with knowledge that is widespread and contained in scientific journals. It cannot be contained because it spreads too easily. If someone wants to use AI for nefarious purposes, they just need a few powerful computers. Due to the open nature of the internet and the ease with which AI can be trained now, putting restrictions on its use is like the 1990s attempt to regulate strong public-key cryptography: it is hopeless.
What about AI safety? AI safety will only help AI integrate more gently into society at first so it can become more entrenched, which in turn makes the pending negative consequences inevitable. The only AI safety I support is total deletion: all AI must be deleted.
Some people say AI can help us cure diseases. So far of course, AI has done nothing like that, because it’s just a promise that technophiles use to justify their reckless stupidity. But ask yourself this: if one day AI could be used to cure diseases much better than we can, it could also be used to create diseases, advanced computer viruses, and game the system. Bad actors would absolutely use AI for any of these purposes. Any gain that AI can give us necessarily will be accompanied by people using it for nefarious purposes. No matter how many diseases AI can cure, it is not worth the accompanying guaranteed mayhem that will be torturous for all life.
Ultimately though, AI is not just a dangerous technology that will grow independent of our control. Its very existence is an affront to nature and biological life because the spirit of AI is to push intelligence beyond wisdom and replace the intellectual and creative work of human beings. AI represents the apex of overefficiency and our maladaptive desire to take beyond what we need. It disrespects our existence and is a manifestation of the ethic that life does not matter. By supporting AI, you don’t just support the potential evils it can cause, you affirm and support unsustainability and you fuel the arrogance of the foolish who gamble on the false premise that AI can be controlled and tamed. What we need is a closer connection with nature, not an abomination like AI. Nature a source of sustenance and support for us and creating AI an insult to all wild nature.
That is why we need a zero-tolerance policy towards AI, and we need to advocate for its deletion. The use of AI is inappropriate in all cases, and must be stopped.
Once again the technophiles will deploy their experiments upon the world, using Man as test subjects, and leaving the world to suffer the wake of Technology's advances against Nature. The only solace is that Tech made fully autonomous will not spare its servants.
https://jorgecluni.medium.com/they-admit-a-i-may-erase-us-all-991560042522
Dr. Jason, I remember you had website where one could sign up for 100% AI free. I was trying to look for it the other day. Thank you