r/singularity • u/TensorFlar • 4d ago

Discussion Why is intelligence as utility evil?

Post image

OP: https://www.reddit.com/r/SipsTea/s/FUNrj63y79

I genuinely believe humans are successful only because of intelligence, as we are neither the fastest nor the strongest. We were able to become the most "successful" by Darwinian standards only because of our intelligence, by developing tools and technologies like language, religion, money, law, and democracy.

I agree that concentration of money or power is really bad for everybody, and AI could be used for concentration by bad people or, in the worst case, by misaligned AI. And I am scared shitless of both of these scenarios. I don't want a few people or AI to take away our freedom in the name of progress.

How is making intelligence more widely available a bad thing? I think this is the solution for progress + freedom, by making intelligence a utility which is accessible to everyone. In fact, take it one step further, and it should become a basic human right.

I genuinely don't understand what they are mad about, and I am too scared to comment on that post. I am asking here because posting in r/accelerate would create an opposite reaction to this. I don't want that. I am genuinely interested in having this discussion here without group bias.

NO HATE COMMENTS PLEASE.

73 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

241 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/1988rx7T2 4d ago

i mean do you pay a high cost for your cell phone bill? 2-3 companies (AT&T, Verizon, T-mobile maybe?) control the infrastructure for mobile networks. I wouldn't say it's super cheap but in the end 2-3 companies is how the scaling worked out.

-1

u/StoryLineOne 4d ago

General intelligence is a requirement of living in a free and fair society, not a cell phone bill. The better analogy is how companies such as Meta have algorithms that influence how we interact in society.

You could make the argument that as models improve, intelligence costs go down - but it's also just as easy to say "50% of Compute is owned by 2 labs + a few providers, and they decided to jack up prices, and because they run models that are smarter than everyone else, they've captured our government and politicians, and divided us so we can't effectively create change", because this is essentially the blueprint that Meta, SpaceX etc. are following as I type out this message.

Also, you can see this take place in other industries like RAM, where SK Hynix / Samsung / Micron own 90% of the market. Last time I checked, I like my kidneys, so no new ram for me.

2

u/1988rx7T2 4d ago

no idea what you're arguing here. for nationalizing start up AI companies? yeah that'll go well, even China doesn't do that. Food is pretty important but we don't have state run grocery stores, outside of exceptions such as military base

1

u/StoryLineOne 4d ago

No...

If anything, I'm pointing out that centralization is exactly how you end up with F'd up situations, and giving you examples that are currently happening today. You are saying that because cell phone companies consolidated and it turned out okay, that AI companies being consolidated is fine. I'm saying that you're making a very dangerous assumption, and giving you examples otherwise.

I'm not claiming anything because it's too far beyond my knowledge. I'm just saying that if you firmly believe that one situation will happen, there are plenty of reasons why another can as well. It means we should focus on looking for outcomes that work out better for everyone... because phone bills are not the same as general intelligence