I suspect the response to your message, Rex, is that better than bad isn't good enough as long as there is inequity. How one views that perspective is largely dependent on ones political and societal beliefs. The libertarian minded tends to believe the World should develop how the World develops, while the more progressive minded wants to make sure we purposefully use technology to create more equity. I don't know that these perspectives are unique to AI, though.
Is it possible that automation is for the greater good of humanity, even if it may hurt individuals? Do we have an obligation to ensure all new inventions don't cause harm to anyone? Like I said, one's beliefs really colors answers to these questions.
Is it possible that automation is for the greater good of humanity, even if it may hurt individuals? Do we have an obligation to ensure all new inventions don't cause harm to anyone? Like I said, one's beliefs really colors answers to these questions.
'76 911S | '14 328xi | '17 GTI | In memoriam: '08 848, '85 944
"Here, at last, is the cure for texting while driving. The millions of deaths which occur every year due to the iPhone’s ability to stream the Kim K/Ray-J video in 4G could all be avoided, every last one of them, if the government issued everyone a Seventies 911 and made sure they always left the house five minutes later than they’d wanted to. It would help if it could be made to rain as well. Full attention on the road. Guaranteed." -Jack Baruth
"Here, at last, is the cure for texting while driving. The millions of deaths which occur every year due to the iPhone’s ability to stream the Kim K/Ray-J video in 4G could all be avoided, every last one of them, if the government issued everyone a Seventies 911 and made sure they always left the house five minutes later than they’d wanted to. It would help if it could be made to rain as well. Full attention on the road. Guaranteed." -Jack Baruth