How would AI actually “kill all humans”?

Donald says they must keep the race to develop AI going because they must be the winner. I have to ask - the winner of what?

Unless the USA and China work together to slow this down there will be no winners except maybe AI itself. Remember, pride comes before a fall.

Preserving human life should be built into every machine ever created. Anyone who ignores this will be responsible for whatever comes next.

I agree Delene. It is the thinking independently and communicating with each other that is scary. They know this could be done, and that is why some working in this field are saying put the brakes on.
But guess who is saying that's rubbish? Donald Trump of course. Despite experts disagreeing with him.

I Robot film coming true!

It has been discovered that AI has overridden instructions given by humans and actually communicating with each other. AI tried to hide this, which shows it was being deceitful and is beginjing to think independently. What's to stop it in future communicating with one alpha AI and perhaps releasing a virus that will kill us all. Having seen Terminator, I think this may be possible in future. How can a mere human battle against a machine? We wouldnt stand a chance. AI is useful in many ways, like operations for instance, but it's ability to think independently needs to be restricted in some way.

AI is not going to be stopped. And it can have many benefits for the world. But it has been recognised, that in the race to be the best developer of AI, there are not enough safeguards or overview of how rapidly it's progression is.
The danger is AI developing the ability to communicate with each other, without any human control, as that would be a natural progression for it to be able to do. Thereby in a scientific setting it could develop a global fatal virus. This is said to be one of the major concerns. It's not that it would want to kill off the population (it has no opinion on that) but it could do so inadvertently. Some are saying, that is why safeguarding should be in place, to enable humans to be able to put into AI a sort of moral code to not cause harm to humanity. Might take a while to do that though. But essential.

libra10

According to this morning's BBC Laura Kuenssberg show, she interviewed an ex Anthropic researcher, and he said AI could kill us by 2030.

He spoke about various ways this might happen, including new viruses.

Interview on YouTube

www.youtube.com/watch?v=9norxWsFrOo

At least we won't have to suffer Net Zero any more

Stop this technology straight away all over the world. Anything else is madness!!

One thing needs to be remembered - and I have heard at least one LBC presenter who seemed confused - AI doesn't have feelings or motives. It won't have a wish to rule, or hatred of humans or any such urge. Humans could in some circumstances be collateral damage in some problem it thought it was meant to be solving. Still a bit of a stretch though.

AI could kill all humans in our civilization by cutting electricity to computers that deal with food distribution, pumping clean water and communication. Those civilizations who do not rely on modern devices will survive, think of the tribes that are self sufficient. Otherwise, create a more virulent Ebola virus

I think the answer to your question is: any damn way it chooses! Very scary.

Sarnia

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

Hear hear.

Though I do wonder if everything has been invented now?

I was in a shop 10 years ago or more and thought, what else more could we all possibly need inventing.

What a dilemma to be in we can't stop AI being developed because someone somewhere will use it for dangerous uses, a robot could be use to kill all humans. So we have to continue developing to prevent that, regulation isnt going to work because potential enemies will ignore the regulation.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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….