An old friend and I had an interesting conversation a while ago. The discussion was quite wide but a few topics are particularly interesting.
We started talking about the surveillance state, and how feeding everything into any system in an attempt to get more contrast in reality equals more noise, more risk and less gain. He was of a differing opinion, wanting more surveillance in order to save lives. His view was that while increased collection and surveillance would lead to more data to sift through, we could always throw more people on it, or a powerful AI once we’re at that point.
Both of these are problematic for the same reason: there will always be people involved. Or maybe I should say there must always be people involved. Automating both judge, juror and executioner would be a disastrous idea that not many would be okay with.Continue reading “Trust me, I’m an A.I.”