Unsurprisingly, the jury is still out on the future of AI
The disruption AI and generative algorithms is causing has sparked a collective brainstorming session in the media. Below are three articles I would recommend as a starting point.
Sam Altman’s response on WSJ Tech Live on the impact of AI on the future of work. His argument is pretty much “we’ve seen this before” and “every hundred or hundred and fifty years, half the jobs we knew disappear”: an argument based on “it’s the speed at which this happens that matters”, because if the process takes place over one and two generations, society absorbs it seamlessly, whereas if it takes place quickly, it creates huge problems.
Yann LeCun challenges Altman’s triumphalism, arguing that AI is still dumber than a cat and will never pose a threat to humans, and that therefore aggressive regulation of it is premature and will only slow down its much-needed refinement, while restricting competition. The idea that a few companies be allowed to oversee development of this technology makes no sense, and legislating on that basis would be like trying to regulate airlines before the airplane was invented.
I was particularly impressed with this piece from InfoWorld, which offers ten reasons to worry about generative AI, which include plagiarism and the absence of truly original thinking in the algorithms’ responses…
