Technology

58507 readers

4109 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

276

The 'Effective Accelerationism' movement doesn't care if humans are replaced by AI as long as they're there to make money from it (www.businessinsider.com)

submitted 9 months ago by ooli@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

49 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] wantd2B1ofthestrokes@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (7 children)

I’m not a proponent of this mindset but this seems like an obvious mischaracterization of the argument

My biggest issues is that it seems to exist only in direct response to “doomers” as they love to say. And are maybe right to criticize, but having the whole thing just being a counter extreme doesn’t work either. And there’s lot of hand waving about technology and history and markets correcting themselves.

But I’ve never gotten the impression that it’s just a cynical “I don’t care if AI fucks everyone as long as I make money.”

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago (4 children)

It's 100% not a mischaracterization. Most of the ghouls involved with these AI companies to a one are effective altruists. Who would gladly see millions suffer and die. If they thought it would mean that they and the people they chose would get to go on and colonize space and other worlds etc. They would totally rip this planet, a new hole and shit all over everything just to get them themselves ahead.

They really really don't care. Altman, musk, Google, Microsoft. They literally couldn't care less. Though you're more than welcome to try to prove otherwise. But I don't condone masochism.

[–] AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Most of the ghouls involved with these AI companies to a one are effective altruists. Who would gladly see millions suffer and die. If they thought it would mean that they and the people they chose would get to go on and colonize space and other worlds etc.

I don't understand what you're saying here given that wikipedia describes effective altruism as:

Effective altruism (often abbreviated EA) is a 21st-century philosophical and social movement that advocates "using evidence and reason to figure out how to benefit others as much as possible, and taking action on that basis".[1][2] People who pursue the goals of effective altruism, sometimes called effective altruists,[3] may choose careers based on the amount of good that they expect the career to achieve or donate to charities based on the goal of maximising positive impact. They may work on the prioritization of scientific projects, entrepreneurial ventures, and policy initiatives estimated to save the most lives or reduce the most suffering.[4]: 179–195

Effective altruists aim to emphasize impartiality and the global equal consideration of interests when choosing beneficiaries. Popular cause priorities within effective altruism include global health and development, social inequality, animal welfare, and risks to the survival of humanity over the long-term future.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism

[–] wantd2B1ofthestrokes@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Effective altruism is something that sounds good in principle, and I still think is good in general, though can kind of run out of control.

Sam Bankman Fried was someone who at least claimed to follow this philosophy. The issue being that you can talk yourself into doing bad things (fraud) in the name or earning money that you would then donate much of.

And more generally get into doing “long term” or “big picture” good while also doing a lot of harm. But hey the ends justify the means.

Again, I think the principle of being a lot more calculated in how we do philanthropy is a huge good thing. But the EA movement has had some missteps and probably needs to be reigned in a bit.

Funnily enough Wiki quotes Altman as one of the critics.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)