Gary Marcus

Rank 11 of 47

Score 115

@AlexAlarga I was referring to skynet in the sense of conscious AI sending robots to kill us (first sentence of OP), contrasting with surveillance (second), which I agree is clearly on the rise.

9/7/2024, 2:16:21 PM

In reply to:

Alex Alarga ⏹️

@AlexAlarga

333d

@GaryMarcus Uhm... Skynet is already a real thing in China _literally_:

Songpinganq

@songpinganq

333d

China's Skynet Explained In Detail

These facial & speech recognition cameras are listening/analysing conversations in public.

And 54% of all surveillance cameras in the world are situated in China.

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

333d

Chance that we will have Skynet in next 36 months: zero

Chance that LLMs will be as part of mass surveillance operations and used in targeted ways to manipulate public opinion in next 36 months: extremely high

Ra Endymion

@Custodian_Ra

333d

@GaryMarcus Given how people are interpreting Meta's financial report. In 12 months we will have this

The statement engages in a discussion about the potential future of AI and surveillance, referencing the fictional concept of Skynet from the Terminator series. It contrasts the idea of AI becoming a conscious entity with the more immediate concern of AI being used for mass surveillance. The tone is analytical and aims to clarify the distinction between two different concerns related to AI.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not cause harm and aims to clarify a point of discussion, thus adhering to the principle of striving to do no harm. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement promotes understanding by distinguishing between different types of AI threats, thus aligning with the principle of promoting understanding, empathy, and compassion. [+1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement engages in constructive dialogue by clarifying a point without resorting to personal attacks, thus adhering to the principle of engaging in constructive criticism and dialogue. [+1]