Comment by blibble
2 years ago
> The dangerous thing about AI regulation is that countries with fewer regulations will develop AI at a faster pace.
"but countries without {child labour laws, environment regulation, a minimum wage, slavery ban} will out compete us!"
That could indeed be:
https://www.google.com/search?q=gdp%20china
It will always be more expensive to care about human suffering than to not. So maybe competing within capitalism isn't the only thing that matters.
Largely true in sectors that are encumbered by those rules. US has effectively no rare earth mines due to environmental impact, labor intensive manufacturing all left... Of course it could be worth it though, pretty easy to argue it has been.
> labor intensive manufacturing all left...
It has also been leaving China for a while. You cannot hope to compete with the poorest country on labor cost, it's not a matter of regulation (well unless we're talking about capital control, but it's a completely different topic)
Does it feel as ridiculous if you s/ai/nuclear weapons/?
The people worried about AI are worried that the first country that achieves ASI will achieve strategic dominance equivalent to the US as of 1946.
No, the people worried about AI are worried that the first country that achieves ASI will achieve strategic dominance equivalent to accidentally releasing an engineered super-pathogen, causing an unstoppable, world-ending pandemic.
Heh. US’ strategic dominance is not due to nuclear weapons.
Uh. That's definitely a statement.
Can you tell me with a straight face that China's actions in the Pacific are not impacted by the US strategic nuclear arsenal?
4 replies →