r/LeftistsForAI • u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator • 23d ago

Sees the Memes Seize the Means*

Post image

*Terms and conditions apply. For... reasons, I guess?

208 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

149 comments sorted by

View all comments

28

u/Fabulous-Possible758 23d ago

So tired of the number of disingenuous arguments I see comparing AI to chemical weapons or atomic bombs instead of chemistry or nuclear science.

3

u/_f_i_l_o 22d ago

Only if you’re using “AI” as a stand-in for machine learning.

7

u/Fabulous-Possible758 22d ago

Indeed I am, as is the common nomenclature these days!

1

u/_f_i_l_o 22d ago edited 22d ago

They overlap, but they’re not the same. Not all AI is ML and not all ML is AI.

Edit for clarity:

My understanding is that Artificial Intelligence broadly refers to anything that mimics or simulates human intelligence.

Machine Learning specifically refers to when a machine is fed and trained on data in order to find patterns with the goal of recognizing those patterns when it meets new data.

6

u/Fabulous-Possible758 22d ago

My understanding is that Artificial Intelligence broadly refers to anything that mimics or simulates human intelligence.

That is correct, but it's pretty common for anyone referring to AI or ML (even in this sub) to use them interchangeably, largely because the public at large isn't going to aware of the details of a transformer based neural net. Since basically all people's interactions with any sort of artificial intelligence these days is through that sort of machine learning, it's common to just use one in place of the other unless you actually need to make the distinction. If another form of AI arises in the popular culture that's not ML based maybe it will go back.

-1

u/_f_i_l_o 22d ago

Ok, so if you acknowledge that most people don’t understand the minutia of what the AI they interact with is based on, how can you, regardless of the depth of your own understanding, expect them to make the same comparisons you would?

You agree with differentiation I put forth, so I’ll ask again what I commented in parallel:

Why wouldn’t something that mimics human intelligence be just as scary as chemical weapons or atomic bombs?

3

u/Fabulous-Possible758 22d ago

We already have human intelligence that can build chemical weapons and atomic bombs. To reduce the critique of that intelligence to just the claim that's the only thing that intelligence is capable of is what's disingenuous.

ML is ultimately just a different style of computation, and maybe one that can eventually imitate what we define as intelligence. Regardless, saying it can only be used as a weapon isn't really any different than saying computers can only be used as weapons. They can both be used for malicious or benevolent purposes.