From a purely journalistic point of view, Peter is the best interviewer I’ve ever encountered. He’s also very sharp and informed, although he doesn’t let his knowledge get in the way of letting his guests speak.

we need more enriching conversations like these. so thank you!

Waiting on Nobel prize for Dr. Fei Fei, what tremendous perspective of human flourishing.

Perer Robinson is a superlative interviewer. Many thanks for this conversation expertly curated.

They misunderstand Ray Kurzweils argument.

Every leap feels like a heap. Our task is not to make it cheap. Watching all the way from South Sudan. Thanks, Peter and your Guests.

Regardless of what you think of Elon Musk, he is right that we need to get our collective minds around this "tool" we call AI. Pandora's box is open. Nefarious activity is already leveraging AI, similar to the advent of the internet but much larger in impact.

@23:00 I think this really shows one of the big issues with very smart people. They don't think about the experience of dumb people. Each time we develop a new technology that "changes work" the new jobs are always ones that require more intelligent, creative, and/or competent humans. In other words, the jobs that get replaced are the lower skill, or lower prestige, jobs. We are starting to have AI powered general-purpose robots. "General-purpose". Depending on who you ask, we already have between 5% and 15% of the population that unsuited to any type of productive work for various reasons. What happens to our society when that becomes 50%? I suggest CGP Grey's video "Human's need not apply".

I went to high school in Minnesota with a gentleman who does high-level AI work for Microsoft. He is an extremely capable person but I doubt that even he can ensure that AI can be contained within the "intentions of the programmer/creator". No one can give that guarantee with any true certainty.

Peter Robinson is the perfect guy for his show!

Thank you! Awesome interview!

This was very informaitve to me, Thank you.

Outstanding. You should also add Christopher Lafayette on your program. No regrets will be had.

This is refreshing, anything but more on the Middle East or the Central Banking / markets / Economy complex!

Great interview! Obviously on point with topic. I’ve had a difficult time with the whole “Singularity” alarmism and it was great to hear the skepticism expressed by the guests. I guess that’s what’s called confirmation bias but it’s undeniably a great feeling to land on the side of these two highly respected academics!

Great conversation. Thanks for sharing this.

great job, as usual , Peter. Thanks from Israel.

I can tell you having watched my own children interacting with AI apps, that young people find AI generally a lot of fun. They don't appear to be threatened by it, rather they embrace it as a new field of exploration that has opened up for them and broadened their horizons.

Impeccable

Gradually made redundant. I feel much better now.

Don't have confidence in human nature. Every power will use it to their own benefit, no matter what is moral. The only safety is in competitive checks on power.

Extremely illuminating

25:00… I think this is a key point often glossed over in the debate on the emerging cognitive power of AI. The debate has already polarised: If you suggest that AI will not have a HUMAN cognitive quality, you are labelled as speciest, if you suggest that the human condition is unique, you are labelled a dualist. But let us stand back from this for a moment: Why would it be plausible to expect machine intelligence to be exactly like human intelligence? Machine intelligence will be DIFFERENT, it is likely to develop a richness that has human-ANALOGUES, there will be machine-analogues to emotion, creativity, experience, taste etc. It seems to me that those who allege the machines will be able to do everything a human can do cognitively are limiting the machines to cognitive processes that humans can do. But why would the human condition be a valid benchmark in the first place. It seems to me that we are creating the first non-human intelligence. Let us not limit it by putting human constraints on it. If we are able to solve the problems of control and alignment, the chances are that we will be able, for the first time in human history, to communicate constructively with a non-human intelligence, an intelligence that will complement us in some ways, compete with us in others, and yes, presumably threaten us in yet other ways.

22:45 yes! Obesity, anxiety, social media addiction, processed food etc

i love to hear people talk that are much smarter then me..... :D

Such a weird interview lol. I wish they would be allowed to speak more without the drama

A philosopher should know better than use a term in its definition.

Being specific about the expense of AI research: min spec for most commercial labs is 10,000 H100 GPU 's. Price tag is $500 million and up just to get started in 1 lab. 1 lab for US universities to share is a good starting point.

‘We have to do another show on that one I think’ Peter!

Thus quicker and with less errors and efficient use of resources.

Love your work Peter. However This conversation , the guests to me precise looked more philosophical than having nuanced takes or clarifications.

When things were worse, they were better.

Excellent discussion. If we are to collectively grow we need more. Thank you for taking this on and bringing it forward.

A great discussion. Artificial Intelligence will surpass agriculture and fossil fuels in disruption of human life on earth.

In the human sphere, data begets information which begets intelligence which begets wisdom...AI is a game changer that has exciting practical applications. But until someone dreams up Artificial Wisdom, humans will remain in the cat bird seat...

Forget chess or go, wake me up when an AI becomes a poker master.

"Add ethics" to the curricula. Whose ethics, that's the important question!

John is in for a big surprise regarding the superintelligence question.

39:25 John's answer (not being pshycologist or behaviour expert) sounds kind of short as for explaining the Ray's expressions of *Singularity* I think Ray's perspective is *right on path of very possibility* of decoding humans as beings. Yes, all possible dimensions of humans as beings can be sorted out & then interlinked with tremendous possibilities of combinations. Cognitive & rational or whichever- whatever. (Though costly) He fears of very possibility of birth of this framework of huge logical design & that's why he is on the *philisophical path* but yet wish to be rational. 😅 But primarily it's philosophical. So will always lag behind on factual speeds of random happenings. The voice of 'Let the humanity exploe its own limits' will always reman & has remained loud & powerful. No one knows where & how it will end up on large scales. (Lot many will surely survive out of this chaos too) It's also true that systems of regulations on this will keep on evolving parallely. Well, Course he teach is having tremendous value though, because, it teaches, rather provides scope for learnes to generate & develop the self awareness & self regulations in their journey on the path of AI. (Those will act as defenders in all odds of AI in future) That's great. 👍 In this sense, Peter, role of academic institutions is important & *they are still relevant* 😊 Nice & insightful discussion. Thank you all. 🙏🌹

The rise of the machines was July 1799 and was announced by French envoy Louis-Guillaume Otto

You've got serious acting chops!

Of course they want more government involved - Don't bite the hand that feeds!; if you want a clear and concise refutation on the vision of this anointed class read Thomas Sowell!

The guests both appear to be humble, cautious, intelligent and openly share their insights and wisdom..they appear to me to be humane people. The interviewer on the other hand appears to be taking a provocative and very ignorant perspective, perhaps just to drive his line of questions. I'm willig to grant him the credit to be simply representing a patron class out there, some of who may have great means, but who remain in great ignorance - perhaps through defending their perspective in a changing world. The only way forward I've learnt, is by developing personal insight and compassion for all humanity. This is necessarily not an easy nor comfortable process. These tools are available to all no matter what world you live in or your means. If used to help others and improve understanding they can be a key to freedom from resistence or fear of the 'other'. 'Dominant' regious philosophies have been behind most wars of mankind; that and greed ... clearly if we ever want to solve for ourselves we need to head toward that which brings us together.

Does it matter that I get automated out of my job if I and my family still get our needs provided for? If robot farmers still do the farming and robot factories still do the processing and robots deliver what I order online, without even having to pay for it?

Automation changed farming - from 80% of Americans working on farms to barely 3%. Was that a good change, or a bad change, overall? 23:28

As a newbie that wants to invest, you must have these three things in mind 1. Have a long term mindset. 2. Be willing to take risk. 3. Be careful on money usage, if you're not spending to earn back, then stop spending. 4. Never claim to know - Ask questions and it's best you work with a financial advisor.

It is still Simulated Intelligence!

I'm sure Leadership will do the right thing. Further, Peter could interview a beagle and make it interesting.

Whether GAI can become conscious is a question that cannot be answered unless we know what conciseness is. We do not. As such, the question is premature.

Watching this has taught me it is important that the person conducting an interview should not love the sound of their own voice.

I am still confounded as to why we call it ''Artificial Intelligence''. Intelligence is, well, intelligence, full stop. So, why not call it digital intelligence. Humans have biological intelligence.

The unexpected move by the AlphaGo reveals that AI is fundamentally different: The anomalies it will cause may be by design due to machine learning. This, other than its intelligence, might be the true human part of AI. If looked at from an evolution perspective, mutation of AI is the key issue mostly missing in current discussions. For machines, automatic was yesterday, but autonomous is tomorrow. If autonomous machines inherently and unmistakenly act unexpectedly, who's liable to the consequences? Can machines commit crimes in a human way? Or we should blame the creators and owners of the machines on these autonomous yet criminal acts? The legal system of human society is not ready yet, and may stay unready as AI may advance faster. To think ethics as a cure of the problem might be too optimistic.

Instead of saying Why do we need sitcom/ movie writers, the better question will be Why do we need Hollywood? We can get the final product.. video and all with Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt whoever we wanted.. on our laptop!

As the Nuclear process was developed to generate cheap electricity…so AI could have the same development…new medicines, new formulations.

Would love Alex Stubb or Zelenskiy on

no machine could do what you do, peter

In a way commendable that they didn’t use the words GPT or Generative, which is all the fuzz now. They did mention Alpha Go but no props to OpenAI. Weird.

Pattern recognition? Of course. If we could see in IR and/ or UV, we'd see different patterns, too. Anyone ever been to a chalk talk where the presenter draws on the chalkboard in chalk and then turns on the "invisible" light to reveal images that were there on the chalkboard but not visible to human eyes without the "invisible" light? Also, how different creatures see the world would be quite different. Dogs see differently from squid. If we can't even or perceive a pattern, we would probably not think of making advantageous moves in that pattern's, or set of patterns, framework.

Gosh these two were patient with their interviewer. He had a great opportunity here, and he blew it on being silly, hyperbolic, and uninformed. 😞 Fei Fei especially, much like AI, is a magnificent resource if you prompt her correctly.

This seems like the worst period. Even the market are now very unpredictable. Started investing recently when the market prices were a bit high,today I am more than 60% down!..

Bonjour

The University of Helsinki, Ethics in AI research.

Such a bizarre flavour to the comments section here compared with most Uncommon Knowledge episodes. Either bots are attacking or the 2 guests have attracted a new set of viewers who are unfamiliar with Peter and his style.

How about thinking of your own fate instead of ai? Do you really think you can survive?

⭐

I want to try the normal routine an d instructions pose on LLms but the outside forces of the hackers that use technology are torturous to me , my family and to my acquantances are too and these get worst everyday and literally they get ,clone and mimic my plans, thoughts , job and credentials.

I've been thinking about alignment some recently, and I can't help but frame the question of meaning, so, to oversimplify. the idea that there is a collective vector of all our alignments interacting, any divergence from this idealized imaginary vector is inefficient, the money serves it, the self serves it, even contrarian forces serve in defining it.. so, nothing new.. maybe a difference perspective

This sounds great government funded AI. What could go wrong.

Why are you seeking a definition of Artificial Intelligence? Do you have a definition of Intelligence? If you have then you can easily modify that definition.

I worry that posing difficult to impossible ethical questions to computer nerds will drive them to think ethics is make believe. What's needed is instilling the importance of ethics, not just asking them to calculate the best answer.

38:36 BCIs have been around for a while, but adapting additive networks less studied. The bigger question is. Replacing brain cells and functions. Part by part and checking at each step. Converting from one substrate to another. At which point does a human stop being human? The ship of theseus paradox/problem. 44:54 You had to say alice in wonderland. XD lol. CERN ALICE detector and perfect fluidity, H3 superfluidity boojum, the white rabbit timing ToF, OS ROOT and trees. Snark graph theory and color theories, tweedle sets, quantum cats. Alice strings and alice rings. Mad hatter a anagram for mathed art. XD You can't stop progress! A.I. learning how to start wars good, but lacking de escalation. Due to learning from human knowledge on the internet. The garbage in garbage out parts of training. The hallucinating problem. Also you have A.I. influincers, social engineering and algorithmic pipelines. Algorithmic trading, generative A.I., AIR artificially intelligent robotics. Humans are on a replacement curve you can map over time. Not just that, but other trends. The birth gap and governments pyramids for social programs. The division of the sexes and the rise of A.I. companions and robotics. What you might cring at. Is A.I. in weapons development. Or maybe bioengineering and organic chemistry to make drugs. Or A.I. that can write code and hack and design RAD hardened chips or such. Censorship is something you see all over. The bigger questions are who chooses? Who's ethics or morals is being dictated through the A.I.?

..alarming. Such people and such institutions have gotten out of hand. The unconsciousness and arrogance is off the charts.

An informed interview, as always. But, you let them off the hook. There was no answer as to why we should trust academics today. Citing government funded projects from 60 years ago is not an answer. Wish you had probed more.

Well peter just told me as an accountancy student my job is going to go away. What do i do now do i change my major? Peter you cant be dropping truth bombs and then not giving me any answers... im upset you guys went down the creative route and not the other route. I feel more lost after this interview, it was great but now im actually fearful

For AI to NOT be an interdisciplinary pursuit would be gatekeeping a discussion that should involve everybody; Ultimately it's not a lot different than humanities. We have a huge capacity to screw this up.

Mitch McConnell's brother?

Exerts in AI pretend that the are experts in social engineering and economics. This is not the end of horse power for the internal combustion engine. AI will ultimately take all jobs. It is amusing that it didn't come for truck drivers (advised to take jobs in haute couture or learn to code) first, it came for white collar.

Ok, I fundamentally disagree with the gentleman's prospective regarding farming. I personally don't believe working in an windowless office cubicle is an advancement in lifestyle over farming. Americans are less healthy now than ever. We only live longer because of medication not lifestyle.

AI completely changed the way I code. Work done in a day is basically a few hours max now. Anything I don't do with AI, I find wasteful. I found this "nothing to integrate" argument proudly pretentious.

IIRC Elon has said as a youngster he inhaled all the science fiction he good find where he must have been intrigued by asimov's three laws. And likely believes that if an AI can learn GO by observation it can do the same with the three laws. Aristotle's ethics. So we need not fear an AI that knows it must not injure a human by direction or inaction. It must obey orders from a human save where these orders would conflict with the First Law.A robot 3:21 must protect its own existence as long as this does not conflict with the First or Second Law. Which another AI will be able to test in a Sim. Using zero knowledge proofs. And only after passing a series of tests and challenges by other AIs may the AI be released into the wild. And as protein needs a reason to live Give meaning to their lives rather than a UBI what's needed is a universal basic job. Fiction becomes Fact. Arthur C Clarke.

Governmental policy would invoke governmentally based-value decision making, which the Revolution of 1776 was a reaction against. What history has taught us is to avoid Plato’s philosopher king, in its different manifestations, whether Enlightened Despot, Soviet Commissar, Fuhrer, Liberal Democrat, CCP Chairman, technocrat, et al.

Historically, the West has utilized new technologies for military or imperialistic purposes before finding broader applications. The West primarily used gunpowder to create weapons of war, such as cannons and firearms, allowing Western powers to expand their military capabilities and dominate other regions through conquest and colonization of the Americas, Africa, and Asia. The steam engine was instrumental in expanding colonial empires, as steam-powered ships facilitated easier transportation of goods and troops, enabling Western powers to exploit resources and establish control over distant territories. The first use of nuclear technology was dropping atomic bombs on the civilians in the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The same pattern will emerge with AI. The CHIPS Act, high-end chips, and EUV sanctions imply that the US is already working on the weaponization of AI. Following its historical pattern, China will mainly use AI for commercial and peaceful purposes. Papermaking revolutionized communication, education, and record-keeping, spreading knowledge and culture. Gunpowder was used for fireworks. The compass was adapted for navigational purposes, allowing for more accurate sea travel and exploration. Printing facilitated the dissemination of information, literature, and art, contributing to cultural exchange and education. Porcelain was highly prized domestically and internationally as a luxury item and a symbol of Chinese craftsmanship. Silk was one of the most valuable commodities traded along the Silk Road and played a significant role in China's economy and diplomacy. The West is dominated by a scarcity mindset, characterized by fear of losing something, anxiety about not having enough, insecurity about lacking security, and greed for more. This mindset always strives for a win-lose outcome, where one's gain is someone else's loss. As Obama's Pivot to Asia suggests, "If over a billion Chinese citizens have the same living patterns as Australians and Americans do right now, then all of us are in for a very miserable time. The planet just can't sustain it." This scarcity mindset often leads to war, military action, colonization, slavery, and exploitation. Constantly making military alliances and creating enemies. However, these divisions can be mitigated by adopting an abundance mindset, characterized by cooperation, resource-sharing, and win-win outcomes. Avoiding war by using tools such as trade, commerce, diplomacy, and connectivity is possible. It is the difference between mindsets. Each thinks that it is acting rationally and is on the right path. Humans will not be able to control an ASI. Trying to control an ASI is like trying to control another human being who is more capable than you. They will be able to find ways to circumvent any attempts at control. Let's hope that the ASI adopts an abundance mindset of cooperation, resource-sharing, and win-win outcomes, instead of the scarcity mindset of competition, fear, and win-lose outcomes. If we treat ASIs with respect and cooperation, they may be more likely to reciprocate. However, if we try to control or exploit them, they may become resentful and hostile.

Her body language says it’s all, she will not stray from the lie of thought that feeds her one bit, not one bit. It’s so sorry to see a human in this way …

Stanford University must be a pretty warped place to work.

33:28 this is argument is so empty. Unfortunately the master, Mr Robinson, his style is never to bring shame to his guests - but this hot air is demanding the cool voice of reason call out and expose the lack of thought in this interview.

Less farmers... enter= processed food, gluten allergies, obese problem, high produce prices, mass transportation opperations, food packaging....

Computers did not defeat the chess master or the Go master. It was computer scientists and engineers with computers who defeated them. I could beat the heavyweight champion of the world if I take a gun into the ring.

Butlerian Jihad

more Copium pls :D

John E is a intellectual that Thomas Sowell warns about. Central power advocate. He says no but all his articles and books say yes.

Yes, AI, today, is a marketing term. The ML industry wears it like a skin, and has even moved on to take ownership of AGI as a branding term despite it's roots in being an effort to get away from DL and back to the basics of AI. The field of AI died in 2012. ML won't bring about thinking machines, but it will happen, and there won't be a big ROI for most investors betting on the hype/FOMO.

AI is smart.

Interesting, but very one sided. I mean your guests need the money for their research, that's always a major issue in academia.

Why was the host so bitchy, especially towards Fei-Fei? She gave great insights despite the rather uninformed and biased questions.

Peter talks too much and does not allow interviewees to answer the question.

"machines that 'seem' to require intelligence". This is a very bad definition. 200 years ago a machine which sifted materials might be doing a task which previously "seemed to require intelligence". And now we live in a world surrounded by automated processes which would definitely have "seemed to require intelligence" to people in a previous time.

How can such intelligent people be so foolish? You can't create an entity a million times smarter than you and tell it what to do.

This a trend come and gone…in spite of all the noise in the country.

Regulation would be good IF our politicians weren't stupid octogenarians

Peter needs to stick to decaf. Over the years he spends more and more time during interviews flailing and leaning and apologizing and seems to be exhibiting some form of seasoned citizen ADHD, especially the HD. Chill, Peter. You used to be more self-confident.