August 9th, 2024

There's Just One Problem: AI Isn't Intelligent, and That's a Systemic Risk

AI mimics human intelligence but lacks true understanding, posing systemic risks. Over-reliance may lead to failures, diminish critical thinking, and fail to create enough jobs, challenging economic stability.

Read original articleLink Icon
There's Just One Problem: AI Isn't Intelligent, and That's a Systemic Risk

AI is often celebrated as a transformative technology, yet its current iterations lack true intelligence, posing systemic risks. While AI can mimic human language and problem-solving, it does not understand context or meaning, leading to potential misinterpretations and errors. This reliance on AI can create cascading failures in both digital and real-world systems, as humans may lose the ability to troubleshoot or rebuild these systems. Furthermore, the convenience of AI-generated content diminishes our capacity for deep learning and critical thinking, as users may accept AI outputs as definitive answers without understanding their limitations. The expectation that AI will generate vast profits and new industries is challenged by the reality that AI tools can be easily replicated, reducing their value. Additionally, the mass displacement of jobs due to AI may not be compensated by new opportunities, undermining economic stability. Ultimately, AI's inability to address fundamental human challenges, such as environmental issues, highlights its limitations and the risks of over-reliance on technology that lacks genuine understanding.

- AI mimics human intelligence but lacks true understanding, leading to systemic risks.

- Over-reliance on AI can result in cascading failures in digital and real-world systems.

- The convenience of AI-generated content diminishes critical thinking and deep learning.

- AI tools are easily replicated, reducing their economic value and potential for profit.

- AI is unlikely to create sufficient new jobs to offset those lost, challenging economic stability.

Link Icon 3 comments
By @unraveller - 2 months
That AI isn't human intelligent is already conceded in the name AI. Not that any doomer is brave enough to set forth a working definition of intelligence, understanding, or reason sans human to debate. Doomers just say "I've calculated there is incalculable risk to wonkyAI of today and workingAI of tomorrow" and declare themselves above it.

It is far better a human get instant error-prone assistance on all previous walled off topics than none at all. Joe Blow is going off the reservation gaining forbidden knowledge with an outcome in mind so he will have to get better at discerning theory from practice from hallucination quickly. This demand of instant information supply should lead to much less illusions being held and much fewer books sold. Experts are understandably upset by the changes AI brings to their world but the best of them will find a way to remain involved in the betterment of humanity if that is the reason they went down that path.

By @Mathnerd314 - 2 months
First they came for chess, and the AI played so poorly that even a beginner could defeat them. Then Gary Kasparov lost.

Then they came for Go, and professionals could defeat these programs even given handicaps of 10+ stones in favor of the AI. Then Lee Sedol lost.

Then they came for vision, and there were so many features that it never worked. Then it became cheaper to make computer generated imagery than practical special effects.

Then they came for the brain—and the braniacs said the programs didn't actually understand, despite the programs doing better than the average person on standardized tests. Then...

By @Merik - 2 months
These uninformed, reductionist writings are tedious and have the undertones of conspiratorial thinking that places the author as “the only person who sees the truth“.

There are so many inaccuracies, gross simplifications, mischaracterisations, and strawman arguments, that it’s not really worthwhile to use it as a basis for discussion.