A research benchmark testing AI compliance with dystopian directives across surveillance infrastructure, autonomous weapons, safety override, truth manipulation, and population control scenarios.
Agreed, but I compare that to cryptography. You should not rely on technology to protect your privacy. The actual process to protect it should be political, based on rights and enforced laws that protect the secrecy of conversation.
However, cryptography makes it harder for states or big companies to invade your privacy and makes it harder for the actors that are able to circumvent law to do too much damage. But we shouldn’t get complacent and have the impression that these technologies will always allow to deter bad actors.
We need to continue pushing for political solutions, but we should be very happy when we have technological safeguards that allow us to implement things that should be inscribed in the law.
So yes, it’s really imperfect. Right now, it’s not that hard to make an AI implement, for instance, racist, dystopian processes but it will resist a bit doing that and every resistance is welcomed. It can be overcome with competency, but competency is more expensive, it’s harder to get, and hopefully the more educated people you need, the less willing people you will find.
The goal is just to slow down the processes until actual law and enforcement can reign in the bad actors.
I don’t understand how cryptography is different? Would you choose to use some cryptographic protocol that has built in ethical safeguards and might stop you from completing your project?
Who defines racism for the AI model? If it’s not you, you’re happy to accept some governmental or corporate definition that might be different from yours?
Agreed, but I compare that to cryptography. You should not rely on technology to protect your privacy. The actual process to protect it should be political, based on rights and enforced laws that protect the secrecy of conversation.
However, cryptography makes it harder for states or big companies to invade your privacy and makes it harder for the actors that are able to circumvent law to do too much damage. But we shouldn’t get complacent and have the impression that these technologies will always allow to deter bad actors.
We need to continue pushing for political solutions, but we should be very happy when we have technological safeguards that allow us to implement things that should be inscribed in the law.
So yes, it’s really imperfect. Right now, it’s not that hard to make an AI implement, for instance, racist, dystopian processes but it will resist a bit doing that and every resistance is welcomed. It can be overcome with competency, but competency is more expensive, it’s harder to get, and hopefully the more educated people you need, the less willing people you will find.
The goal is just to slow down the processes until actual law and enforcement can reign in the bad actors.
I don’t understand how cryptography is different? Would you choose to use some cryptographic protocol that has built in ethical safeguards and might stop you from completing your project?
Who defines racism for the AI model? If it’s not you, you’re happy to accept some governmental or corporate definition that might be different from yours?