How would AI actually “kill all humans”?

Or Terminator

Supposing an AI is given the task of 'saving the planet'.
And then the AI works out, from it's data banks, what is causing the most damage.
😨

I think it is a red herring. It may even protect us. The biggest threat to us is The Network State which is highly active and growing. Run by tech savvy crypto billionaaires its seeks a perfect society like in games theory where you go for the next level. What this means is that cloud states get real land and communities which a gated for the very savvy, very rich. If you dont qualify you are excluded . No revolution just not allowed in. We can see the beginnings on it in how many people, the old and the poor are excluded from everything from parking at your local park or contacting your GP unless you have an app. We are sliding into this technological rich pure state. not out of hate, not out of greed they see it as a need for better society. I really am not making this up.

TerriBull

It does seem that there are a tidal wave of articles right now on the subject, the most alarmist, we've only got until the end of the decade. Whilst others mention the need to slow it down. The Genie seems to be well and truly out of it's bottle and whilst AI will undoubtedly have many benefits those will be cancelled out by the fact that we, the human race, may well be cancelled out so what use will those be ?

I think I won’t save my money but splurge and buy new clothes and boots for Winter ( there’s always a silver lining, see?)

Maremia

Supposing an AI is given the task of 'saving the planet'.
And then the AI works out, from it's data banks, what is causing the most damage.
😨

Works out that the UK would work better with only 20 million people in it.😬

Be sensible Oreo, you can't eat boots, even if you use them for collecting rain water you won't find they'll do anything for hunger pangs. Go and buy some tins of whatever and maybe a packet or two of Oreos.

Assuming it doesn't go on for too long whatever shortages occur, might lose a 1lb or two, so yes! always look on the bright side of life! As Eric Idle was prone to warble

I had some tins of whatever but DP ate them when I was out.
I do always have some Oreos on the go 🤭

Rocknroll5me

I think it is a red herring. It may even protect us. The biggest threat to us is The Network State which is highly active and growing. Run by tech savvy crypto billionaaires its seeks a perfect society like in games theory where you go for the next level. What this means is that cloud states get real land and communities which a gated for the very savvy, very rich. If you dont qualify you are excluded . No revolution just not allowed in. We can see the beginnings on it in how many people, the old and the poor are excluded from everything from parking at your local park or contacting your GP unless you have an app. We are sliding into this technological rich pure state. not out of hate, not out of greed they see it as a need for better society. I really am not making this up.

i really am not making this up
I know you’re not. I’ve seen several programs on it on the German tv staton DW.
It showed several islands in the Danube.

Oreo, might I suggest you start storing you tin stash in your nuclear bunker, and keep the key about your person, that'll teach o/h to pilfer in future.

thanks petra..it's the "Only We Can Save You" Trap....by making AI an existential threat, power will be stripped away from voters and give it to a tiny vanguard of elite data scientists and tech tycoons. They use the fear of AI to justify bypassing democratic oversight entirely, arguing that survival requires algorithmic, top-down control. creates panic and hands over a very useful tool.

I have today been talking with someone who did a DPhil in AI in the 90s and has been working in that field ever since. He really scared me. He said that these "agents", sort of AI cells that get together, can now talk to each other in a non-language way, a bit like thought, which a human can't understand. (Mostly, they talk in a sort of abbreviated English.)
He also said that it's not going to be water that's the problem, but electricity.

I’m more worried about all the jobs that will be taken over by AI leaving people without occupation or income.

BlueBelle

I refuse to worry about it, you can send yourself mad thinking about everything that ‘could’ happen. I could get run over tomorrow, I could have someone break in and hit me over the head, I could develop a serious disease, my house could fall in a sink hole, a plane could crash I can’t change any of these things and I can’t change AI so why should I make myself nervous and unhappy and scared about something I can do absolutely nothing about and that I don’t even know which way it will go good /helpful or bad /destructive

Totally agree with you….

Romola

I have today been talking with someone who did a DPhil in AI in the 90s and has been working in that field ever since. He really scared me. He said that these "agents", sort of AI cells that get together, can now talk to each other in a non-language way, a bit like thought, which a human can't understand. (Mostly, they talk in a sort of abbreviated English.)
He also said that it's not going to be water that's the problem, but electricity.

This was a good listen. Clearly explained.

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct9784

Maremia

Supposing an AI is given the task of 'saving the planet'.
And then the AI works out, from it's data banks, what is causing the most damage.
😨

If you ask me what is the single biggest danger to the planet, I would say the combination of climate change and the destruction of nature. They are closely connected, but climate change is the part that can most rapidly make other environmental problems worse.

And I don’t think the answer is that ordinary people should feel guilty about every flight, plastic bag or steak. The scale of the problem requires changes to the way economies produce energy, food, transport and goods.

The situation is serious, but I don’t think it’s hopeless.

What worries me most

1. Climate change

Every additional fraction of a degree matters. The IPCC finds that climate risks increase with every increment of warming, affecting food, water, health, ecosystems and infrastructure.

The particularly worrying thing is that we’re not currently on a trajectory for a safe level of warming. UNEP’s latest assessment puts us around 2.8°C this century under current policies, and around 2.3–2.5°C even if countries fully implement their present pledges.

That doesn’t mean the world will end at 2.8°C. It means a considerably more difficult and unstable world.

2. Loss of nature

This is the other side of the problem. We’re destroying forests, wetlands, soils, oceans and habitats while putting enormous pressure on wildlife.

And nature isn’t simply something nice to have. It provides pollination, fertile soil, clean water, carbon storage, fisheries and protection against flooding.

The IPCC warns that biodiversity risks rise sharply with warming and that climate change combined with habitat destruction and other pressures can push ecosystems beyond their ability to adapt.

So what should we actually do?

I’d put the priorities roughly like this:

1. Get electricity largely off fossil fuels.

This is probably the biggest single practical change: solar, wind, nuclear where appropriate, hydro, storage and stronger electricity grids.

It’s encouraging that renewable electricity has been growing extraordinarily quickly. The challenge is to do it much faster and everywhere, rather than continuing to build new fossil-fuel infrastructure.

2. Electrify as much as possible.

Cars, heating and much of industry can increasingly run directly on clean electricity.

3. Attack methane.

This doesn’t get as much public attention as CO₂, but cutting methane emissions from oil and gas production, agriculture and waste can produce relatively rapid climate benefits.

4. Stop destroying forests and other ecosystems.

Protecting existing forests is generally more valuable than planting new trees to compensate for destruction elsewhere. And we need to restore wetlands, peatlands, mangroves, soils and damaged ecosystems.

5. Change agriculture without pretending everyone has to become vegan.

I’d concentrate on reducing the most environmentally damaging forms of agriculture, improving soil and water management, reducing food waste and making lower-impact food readily available and affordable.

6. Make pollution expensive and clean alternatives cheap.

This is where governments matter enormously. If polluting is cheaper than doing the right thing, people and businesses will generally follow the economic incentive.

Carbon pricing, environmental regulation, subsidies for clean technology and ending subsidies for fossil fuels can change that equation.

7. Adapt to the damage that’s already unavoidable.

Even if we stopped emitting tomorrow, some warming and sea-level rise would continue. So we need better flood protection, heat planning, water management, resilient agriculture and protection of vulnerable communities.

And what about ordinary people?

I actually think this is where the climate debate sometimes goes wrong.

I’d encourage people to:

* waste less food
* use energy efficiently
* buy fewer things that they don’t really need
* keep cars for longer rather than constantly replacing them
* choose public transport or walking when convenient
* eat a little less meat if that’s practical
* protect wildlife and biodiversity locally
* vote for politicians who take the issue seriously.

But I wouldn’t tell someone that their individual behaviour is the main solution.

If one person switches off their lights, that is good. But if a government builds a clean electricity system serving millions of homes, that’s transformational.

And there’s actually a hopeful aspect here. Many of the things that reduce emissions also make life better: cleaner air, cheaper renewable electricity, warmer and more efficient homes, less traffic pollution, better public transport and healthier cities. UNEP specifically points to benefits such as improved health, jobs and energy security from climate action.

So my overall view would be:

Don’t panic. Don’t deny the problem. And don’t waste all our energy blaming individuals.

We need to make the environmentally sensible choice the easy, affordable and normal choice for billions of people.

And, perhaps most importantly, we shouldn’t give up because 1.5°C may be exceeded. The IPCC is very clear that every fraction of warming avoided reduces risk. Going from, say, 2.8°C to 2.3°C would not be a failure—it would mean avoiding an enormous amount of suffering.

That’s why I think there is still a very good reason to be hopeful, while being completely realistic about the seriousness of the problem.

It was also on our news that it is ‘possible’ that the human race could become extinct in around 10 years. They cited a robot that ‘escaped’ This wasn’t Utube crapping on, either. It was one of our ‘respected’ channels similar to the BBC. Nothing we could do about it anyway - they weren’t talking about global warning . Science fiction ? Maybe,maybe not. Anyway I won’t be around to see it.

It seems a bit thick of Elon Musk and Co. to appeal to world governments to put safeguards in place to restrict the increasing power of AI - why did they open Pandora's Box in the first place?

Well, obviously, short-term greed.

We won’t be stockpiling anything, we do have supplies of cereal and tinned goods in the garage because we buy them when they are on offer. I remember the panic about the Millenium bug which came to nothing.

Instead of polishing off people why can't the boffins programme these things for the good of the world?

I remember the panic about the Millenium bug which came to nothing.

Well, this panic isn’t coming to nothing, it is happening right now. The Millennium bug was anticipated and avoided by a concentration IT resources working to eliminate it. Climate change hasn’t been so well prepared for and we and our families will pay the unpleasant price.

Excellent couple of posts, Daddima, but I would disagree with letting individuals off the hook.

Margs

It seems a bit thick of Elon Musk and Co. to appeal to world governments to put safeguards in place to restrict the increasing power of AI - why did they open Pandora's Box in the first place?

Well, obviously, short-term greed.

I do agree it's a bit rich of all these sorcerer's apprentices telling world governments to put safeguards in place. We have Sam Altman CEO of ChatGPT maker of Open AI telling the world in alarming terms that artificial intelligence can go very badly wrong as well as the testaments of various AI whistle blowers. We, the human race can lose control of the future we're told. Why should we trust these people with our futures? more importantly, those of the up and coming generations. Particularly, as so many appear morally bankrupt and power crazy as demonstrated by the likes of Elon Musk. hmm! time to storm The Bastille me thinks although of course the Pandora's Box has been well and truly opened, I imagine we're powerless pawns, the people's ship has sailed.

Well they’ve created a Frankenstein that puts Mary Shelley’s version to shame.
Tech is great until isn’t. Have been saying for a long time that tech is developing too fast for us to keep up with it and so causing massive problems that imho put the benefits in the shade.
Is a long time since tech made my life easier, in fact has frequently put me in a corner where I can’t access anything easily and have to ask for help.

From our position as "ordinary people" what can we do, without putting on sackcloth and ashes and going round bewailing "The end is nigh!" ?

1) Vote for MPs, MSPs, MEPs, local councillors, and so on, who will support clean sources of energy from renewable resources line wind, water and sunshine.
2) Turn lights off in rooms we are not using.
3) Turn heat down or off in rooms we are not using.
4) Take public transport whenever possible.
5) Don't fly to the other side of the globe for a holiday or a stag/hen party.
6) Plan ahead and buy what we know will be eaten. Resist buying too much and having to throw half of it away.
7) Cook several things at once to make best use of the heat in the oven.
8) Don't buy clothes we will never wear.
9) Look after the clothes we already have.
10) Check what is in the charity shops (in the next town, if the stock locally is likely to come from our neighbours)
11) Don't buy things which have had to be transported halfway round the world (difficult when everything now seems to be made in China, or grown in some foreign desert irrigated by state-sponsored water)
12) Support British growers and manufacturers whenever we can.