newYou can now listen to Fox News articles.
Concerns that AI will interfere in the 2024 election are well-founded, but not unprecedented in recent history. In 1975, the Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA foreshadowed today’s concerns about AI.
Asilomar has set a precedent for how to respond to changes in scientific knowledge. According to conference organizers biochemist Paul Berg and molecular biologist Maxine Singer, the appropriate response to new scientific knowledge is to create guidelines that specify how it should be regulated. Ta.
They were just as wrong as those calling for AI regulation. Solutions will not be found through regulation, but by debunking assumptions about processing huge datasets at the expense of sustainability. Brute force calculations sold as intelligence are a scam!
The challenge of AI and the 2024 election is an ethical one. Not subject to regulation. (Getty Images)
The challenge of AI and the 2024 election is an ethical one. Not subject to regulation. We have made a Faustian bargain with AI. If we do not challenge the science behind AI, its impact will irreversibly impact the future of humanity.
‘Grossly out of control’: D.C. resident steals new technology as others raise concerns about election interference, job losses
Since we can’t put the genie back in the bottle, we need to understand how to mitigate the potential dangers to society and democratic systems implicit in AI’s deterministic foundations.
Our actions are not only driven by the past, as represented by AI-processed data, but also by the future that can arise if we make responsible choices.
AI doesn’t care who wins the presidential election. It solves mathematical problems. Not long ago, Kenneth Arrow won the Nobel Prize for showing how elections can be manipulated.
Some AI learning-based processes, using huge numbers, aim to engineer the behavior of 10 to 12 percent of the voting population who have never been on the election radar before. This is a political goldmine waiting to be exploited.
Americans fear these ‘creepy’ deepfakes will manipulate people in 2024 elections, ‘alarming falsehoods’
Is it ethical to consider behavioral engineering? Never mind whether this is a legal tool or not.
Our political system, already subject to cannibalism, is being undermined by replacing human judgment with machine reasoning. It must be understood that mechanical technology does not have a proactive aspect. There is no ethics in using a hammer. There is no difference between a nail and a human head.
An automatic hammer is actually a gun.is automated know except for know the reason.The automatic abacus called computer is very good at data processing, but it has zero know the reason ability. There is no sense of right and wrong, no conscience.
In fact, Turing machines are the basis on which all computations exist, and they only know the limits of physics, expressed as data volume, processing speed, and cost (energy used). There is no human aspect represented by the meaning of the data.
For more FOX News opinions, click here
Advances based on data processing mean destruction at all costs unless we rein in it. The Asilomar Conference is living proof. Participants recognized how dangerous genetic manipulation can be and were looking for guardrails.
When we talk about AI today, the recent changes in how memory functions due to the coronavirus may ring alarm bells. Also, don’t forget about genomic hysteria. All diseases are curable. Today, AI promises to make healthcare better. But the reality is that many more diseases have been created man-made.
AI is already make drugs more expensive But it’s not necessarily more effective. AI regulations are of the same nature as those supported by Asilomar. It is enthusiastically supported by people who want to secure a high position. However, it cannot prevent abnormal applications.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
What we need is a scientific foundation that does not reduce behavior to the physics and chemistry of matter. So far we have failed to do so. This is reflected in the increasingly pathological and delusional nature of human life in the 21st century.
I hope we wake up and choose the right path. The clarion call to destroy science is not arbitrary, but an existential imperative.
Click here to read more from Mihai Nadin