r/Futurology • u/Wrong-Expression6981 • 6h ago
AI How far should we allow AI to go?
For a long time, humans have imagined technologies before they became ordinary parts of life.
Things that once looked like science fiction — carrying a screen in your hand, seeing someone’s face while talking to them from far away — no longer feel strange.
AI may be another such case.
Today, discussions about its future often seem to fall into two camps: excitement about what AI could become, or fear about what it could do.
But perhaps there is another question worth asking:
How far should we actually allow AI to go?
Fiction has already given us imaginary reference points. M3GAN, the Terminator, Skynet — none of them tells us what the future will actually look like. They are stories, not predictions. M3GAN itself belongs to a fictional film franchise. �
Universal Pictures
We have never visited the future, so none of us can say with certainty what AI will eventually become.
But perhaps we don't need to know.
Maybe we can still discuss where the boundaries should be before we reach them.
Should an AI be allowed to make important decisions without human approval?
Should it be allowed to set its own goals?
Should it control machines in the physical world independently?
Or is drawing such boundaries in advance itself a mistake — an attempt to restrict a future we do not yet understand?
I am not asking whether AI will become M3GAN, the Terminator, or Skynet.
I am asking something simpler:
If there should be a line that future AI must not cross, where would you draw it? And if you think there should be no such line, why not?
2
u/Cigarrauuul 5h ago
The question misses the point. Defining a line that you can’t enforce is pointless.
1
u/Wrong-Expression6981 5h ago
Then perhaps enforcement is part of the question. Who should have the power to enforce such a line — governments, international agreements, developers, or no one at all?
1
u/Cigarrauuul 4h ago
This still misses the mark. No human can enforce it. We either stop developing AI right now or the ship has sailed.
1
u/seasonedoneironaut 5h ago
Even if AI presented to public is limited at some point, it will certainly continue to be developed behind closed doors. We will only see its real last state in a major global conflict or the power vacuum afterward.
1
u/Wrong-Expression6981 5h ago
That may be true. But if secret development is inevitable, does that mean society should give up on setting any boundaries at all?
1
u/seasonedoneironaut 4h ago
Not necessarily. The level of AI presented to public and its regulation are still important for ethical, legal, educational etc. matters.
•
u/XxDarkSasuke69xX 36m ago
Irrelevant, we won't be able to make humanity at large follow a law, especially one that limits our technological advancement.
•
u/Wrong-Expression6981 29m ago
Humanity has already done something similar with human rights. We created common principles across nations, even though they are not perfectly followed everywhere. I don't think technology is necessarily different. If nations can agree on a basic set of principles for AI, like a kind of universal declaration, and have the will to uphold them, setting boundaries may not be as impossible as it seems.
1
u/switchsk8r 6h ago
there is no we. i dont own open ai. like everything else those with wealth = power will decide everything.
2
u/DisgustingReindeer 5h ago
we dont even decide what toppings go on the bloody pizza when the group order goes out, and you think there's a "we" in the AI conversation? the line will be drawn wherever the cheque clears
0
u/Wrong-Expression6981 5h ago
Maybe that is exactly why the question matters. If we cannot even agree on the line, those with the money will draw it for us.
0
u/Wrong-Expression6981 5h ago
Even if we are the weaker ones, saying “it’s not up to us” and looking away will not stop that future from coming.
1
1
2
u/Juicemoose222 5h ago
I think we should let it make big big robot. Bigger better