The car analogy is the standard regurgitated response to anybody who questions the pace of technological development.
First, horses weren’t slow and safe.
Second, cars aren’t autonomous and they have relatively narrow use cases compared to AI.
Third, cars were eventually heavily regulated to prevent accidents and reduce serious injury from inevitable accidents. That’s why you have to wear seatbelts and cars top speeds are regulated.
Fourth , rather than using basing what do about AI on how we handled the introduction of cars, maybe we should focus on the facts, data, evidence specific to AI.
It’s fine to reflect on the past to think about how to build the future. Maybe we shouldn’t jump to the conclusion because we did something in the past we should do it again in a completely different context with a completely different technology.
Edit: fixed the count of points from “Fourth” to “Third” and “Fifth” to “Fourth”
First, horses weren’t slow and safe.
Second, cars aren’t autonomous and they have relatively narrow use cases compared to AI.
Third, cars were eventually heavily regulated to prevent accidents and reduce serious injury from inevitable accidents. That’s why you have to wear seatbelts and cars top speeds are regulated.
Fourth , rather than using basing what do about AI on how we handled the introduction of cars, maybe we should focus on the facts, data, evidence specific to AI.
It’s fine to reflect on the past to think about how to build the future. Maybe we shouldn’t jump to the conclusion because we did something in the past we should do it again in a completely different context with a completely different technology.
Edit: fixed the count of points from “Fourth” to “Third” and “Fifth” to “Fourth”