Not that I agree with the article, but these arguments fall pretty flat: People can imagine the end of the world more easily than imagining the end of capitalism. Banning a particular technology would be a much easier thing to do, and even if it didn’t totally solve the problem, halfway solutions or delaying the inevitable is generally better than doing nothing at all (if less cathartic/satisfying).
Again, I don’t agree that we should ban AI, but that’s more because I believe it can actually be a force for good. If I didn’t believe that though, it would be tactically correct to try to ban it.
Again, I don’t agree that we should ban AI, but that’s more because I believe it can actually be a force for good. If I didn’t believe that though, it would be tactically correct to try to ban it.