Sentient AI: For the love of Darwin, let’s Stop to Think if We Should
We recorded 2 claims from this post. 2 can’t be checked. 2 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (2)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“We see few risks in the current regime, but fewer reasons to tempt fate by blithely assuming that anything that we might invent can be dealt with.”
What we tested: We should not blithely assume that anything we might invent in AI can be dealt with.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“AI, like any technology, is subject to the risk of unintended consequences, quite possibly more so, and the wider we open Pandora’s box, the more risk we assume.”
What we tested: AI is subject to the risk of unintended consequences, possibly more than other technologies, and expanding its capabilities increases that risk.
Held from this post (2)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: As of August 2023, humans cannot control LLMs.
- Attribution is uncertain