Bernie is not wrong about the potential threats posed by AI.
Emma Vigeland and her guest the other day (on The Majority Report) downplayed the AI threat and somewhat mocked Bernie for not adequately understanding the related problems (in their assessment). But I don’t think it’s Bernie who misunderstands the issues, threats, and risks.
First of all, I think it’s safe to say that Bernie agrees that all of the issues Emma mentioned (economic, social, environmental, etc.) regarding AI are indeed serious and real. Those problems are discussed more frequently and understood better. But the threats related to an autonomous AGI/ASI… are also serious and real. And even if some of the worst outcomes were only estimated to have a 0.01% of happening… that would still need to be addressed by serious people.
Consider the likelihood of AI owning and operating a corporation as CEO… if you’re at all up-to-date about current AI capabilities, you’ll know that’s already essentially possible with public, consumer-grade AI. Even if unofficially… AI is effectively making business decisions for people. So, I think you can imagine a more independent and autonomous AI controlling bank/crypto accounts and making business decisions -- even if that requires hiring humans. I’d go so far as to say that political donations might count as business decisions. Remember... "Corporations are people, my friend."
I understand we’re talking more about recursively self-improving AI that manages to become evermore capable and independent, but I wanted to establish the baseline of where we’re already at. In a world where we already have the potential for autonomous battlefield drones... a malicious AI could be problematic even if it were merely doing what a human asked of it. But, indeed, AGI/ASI is something beyond that – which is precisely what makes it that much more potentially dangerous.
As for the coding capabilities of the current popular models? The zero day bug discoveries should not be discounted. It seems obvious that AI is already going to be used in the coding/production of the next generation AI. That will increasingly be true. When we get to the stage where it’s self-improving autonomously and moving to the point where humans can’t really understand the underlying code… AGI/ASI is on the horizon and approaching quickly.
I also question the argument that we shouldn’t take the problem seriously because tech-bro oligarchs think it’s a problem. Well, look… it’s not just the tech-broligarchs who are worried. You do not have to dig deep to find very significant computer scientists claiming it’s a very serious, and very real problem.
I don’t think the “alignment” problem with AI can really be “solved” because powerful AI could always be let off the leash by any entities that control it. Or it could be compromised any number of other ways, but I digress. After the next elections… all those data centers will probably need to be nationalized.
That said… I think AI could be used far more constructively and efficiently. And to the extent that geo-engineering may be required to deal with global warming… a super-intelligent engineer might be useful to improve energy efficiency and promote ecological restoration. I don’t expect it to happen, but… a more idyllic Star Trek future is possible. Control and proper governance of AI is essential if that future is to exist.