A useful question to ask yourself is, "How would I know if I were wrong? What kind of evidence would convince me that a decision was not driven primarily by financial incentives?"
If your "model" is equally compatible with all possible observations -- if anything that happens actually confirms the model rather than disproving it -- then it's not actually that useful as a model.
> In particular, it's obvious to anyone who's been paying attention that the west halting/ceding AI research only means the likes of China will just come out ahead from not bothering to stop (spoiler alert: China cares not for trivialities like ethics and morals).
Right, and that's why I said "would if they could". From their perspective, saving the human race would require stopping all research, including research done in China.
A useful question to ask yourself is, "How would I know if I were wrong? What kind of evidence would convince me that a decision was not driven primarily by financial incentives?"
If your "model" is equally compatible with all possible observations -- if anything that happens actually confirms the model rather than disproving it -- then it's not actually that useful as a model.
> In particular, it's obvious to anyone who's been paying attention that the west halting/ceding AI research only means the likes of China will just come out ahead from not bothering to stop (spoiler alert: China cares not for trivialities like ethics and morals).
Right, and that's why I said "would if they could". From their perspective, saving the human race would require stopping all research, including research done in China.