[Link] White House announces a series of workshops on AI, expresses interest in safety

post by AspiringRationalist · 2016-05-04T02:50:22.434Z · LW · GW · Legacy · 10 comments



Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by Gunnar_Zarncke · 2016-05-06T03:44:04.881Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I think despite all the moderate phrasing the threat is already seen somewhat and coordination is starting to address it. I think this is what is hidden behind this:

A new National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) Subcommittee on Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence will meet for the first time next week. This group will monitor state-of-the-art advances and technology milestones in artificial intelligence and machine learning within the Federal Government, in the private sector, and internationally; and help coordinate Federal activity in this space.

comment by Gram_Stone · 2016-05-04T23:14:06.842Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

It's hard to tell if this is good or bad. They don't say anything about extinction risks. This could be because they've recognized the possibility of extinction and talking about it is just politically unfashionable, or it could be because they don't consider that a credible concern, in which case, one possibility is, this would be good in the short term but would probably lure people into a false sense of security in the long term, unless things change more.

Replies from: ignoranceprior
comment by rpmcruz · 2016-05-04T12:16:41.152Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

It is pretty exciting. :)

I only recently learned about the Brain Initiative (USA) and the Human Brain Project (European Union). As I understand it, both were started in 2013. First the Brain Initiative, and then the European Union responded with the Human Brain Project. Anyone knows what kind of developments have accrued from them so far?

Replies from: jacob_cannell
comment by jacob_cannell · 2016-05-06T06:42:55.657Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Other way around. Europe started HBP started first, then US announced the BI. The HBP is centered around Markham's big sim project. The BI is more like a bag of somewhat related grants, focusing more on connectome mapping. From what I remember, both projects are long term, and most of the results are expected to be 5 years out or so, but they are publishing along the way.

comment by [deleted] · 2016-05-04T16:57:30.021Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I wonder at the timing of this article and upcoming workshops.

I'm not deep in the AI community... did something happen recently to spark greater interest and preparation for AI? Any big news story I somehow missed?

Maybe the topic's been on the backburner at the White House and they're only just getting it started now; regardless, it sounds promising.

Replies from: Gram_Stone, Mitchell_Porter
comment by Gram_Stone · 2016-05-04T23:13:24.414Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Bostrom's bestselling book Superintelligence, the series of articles on Wait But Why, and Elon Musk's founding of the Future of Life Institute and the Open Letter, are some examples of increased awareness in the past two years.

comment by Mitchell_Porter · 2016-05-06T09:56:06.367Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

The big new problem in presidential decision theory is Coherent Extrapolated Trump.

Replies from: Lumifer
comment by Lumifer · 2016-05-06T14:55:23.887Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

That's easy. Fame, money, deals, and pretty girls :-P

comment by jacob_cannell · 2016-05-06T06:43:19.916Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

A sign!