Blade Runner director Ridley Scott calls AI a “technical hydrogen bomb” | “we are all completely f**ked”::undefined

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I like some of his movies but this article reads like someone who just imagined his worst fears, and with no ability to judge if it’s probable or not.

    The AI would turn off the worlds money system? What?

    • Alex@lemmy.minecloud.ro
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Since he reached old age the man has gone completely senile and really not putting a bullet in his brain is doing the whole world a disfavor. I’m not saying that he single handedly destroyed a franchise by shunning aside Neill Blomkampf, then unironically making alien:covenant, then blaming fans for its failure, besides many other ramblings. I mean even in it’s current crappy state AI is at the very least 10x the writer Scott is and once they jam it into a robot body it will probably be 100x the director he is. So I can at least understand his concern. Motherf…

      I remembered where I was going with this, the man is essentially another George Lucas who thinks that just because they created something they have the right to destroy it.

      • zoomshoes@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        He should be shot because he made artistic decisions you don’t agree with? That’s wild.

        • Alex@lemmy.minecloud.ro
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          Non fans won’t get it and that’s fine, I was also scratching my head at the hans shot first and prequel trilogy fiascos when I first encountered them. But a simpler example to grasp is lets say if Leonardo Davinci came back from the dead and painted a mustache on the mona lisa because why the fuck not? The main complaint is that he was dissatisfied with the pull of prometheus which was a decent movie by itself but unrelated to the alien franchise and decided that he can have a bigger audience and pull if he frankensteined them together. So I don’t give a crap about his creative decisions as long as he keeps it out of stuff that does not require it. Another example would be Elon Musk buying twitter and essentially destroying the platform. Did that truly benefit anyone?

            • Alex@lemmy.minecloud.ro
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              I wasn’t being literal, the topic is a 100 year old man pointing at ai and shaking uncontrollably while pissing himself, I’m just saying that the mans track record since he hit like 58 has been spotty at best so lets treat everything that comes out of his mouth as what it is: trash. He should have been placed in a retirement home 10 years ago, or at the very least not paid attention to or given any money for projects. You give a senior citizen a drivers license and then he runs over 50 pedestrians cause he is senile and half blind, whose fault is that?

    • the_q@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      So you know enough about AI to know that worrying about something like “turning off the world’s money” isn’t possible? What’s your career?

      • asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        You don’t need to know anything about AI to know that. Just do some basic critical thinking:

        • What does “world’s money system” mean? A stock exchange? Software that runs some process at the Federal Reserve of a specific country? Credit car company databases? What? It isn’t centralized.
        • The ability to “turn it off” means what exactly? Do you think there’s some switch to disable all credit card transactions for a whole company? Or just break their software?

        Even if AI is perfected, nobody in their right mind would give direct control of these things to an AI. There isn’t any reason to. An AI would basically just be another person, but super smart. It could be useful for a lot of things, but their decisions would need to be vetted by humans, and there isn’t anything like a “shut it off” switch that exists as it is.

    • Aleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Seriously, he’s a director that made sci-fi movies. He has no qualifications whatsoever to answer this question. Of course, this will still rile up the critical thinking challenged crowd.

      • tankplanker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I used to think he completely lost it when he had the characters acting so dumb in his recent Alien universe films, for example when the crew of prometheus took off their helmets, but then watching how large parts of society acted with covid I am now not sure.

        Humans repeatedly make bad choices, somebody is going to be really really dumb with their AI implementation when it gets to the level of actually being able to manage things.

    • celerate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      I agree, yet for some reason celebrities who are not qualified to comment on these things have their voices amplified by the media.

  • aberrate_junior_beatnik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I may not be a computer scientist in real life, but I directed a movie based on a short story written by someone else who isn’t a computer scientist in real life.

  • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    This is equivalent of someone saying “I am afraid of nuclear energy, imagine every country running dozens of nuclear bombs that can go off at any moment”. He clearly has no clue how AI works and is just fallen under the influence of fear mongers who know even less.

  • Donkter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Christ, a good litmus test is that anyone who says "I’m afraid of AI because…’ and then describes the end of modern civilization/the world can be dismissed.

    This man’s argument is literally “you could ask AI how to turn off all the electricity in Britain and then it would do it.” Goddam.

    • rosymind@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m less afraid of the tech itself, and more afraid of how it can be weilded by power-hungry human beings. As long as it never has desires of it’s own, we’re fine

  • mannycalavera@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Yes, because we should all take note of what the art student says about AI. This guy is, essentially, a clown in this field. Why should we listen to him?

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      He may not be an expert, but he has had thoughts of different future scenarios resulting from technology for probably about 60 years. Although society has developed in that time, the basics remain the same. His thoughts on AI aren’t new, it’s the fact that AI is moving fast now that is new.

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    When the camera was invented, a lot of comercial artists lost their jobs. Why print an ad featuring a realistic drawing of your car, when you could just run a photograph?

    People say they hate modernism, but it’s a direct result of the photograph. Artists had to create things a photographer couldn’t. What’s the point of realism if it can be recreated effortless with the press of a button?

    I do wonder what jobs AI will replace and what jobs they’ll create? How will this change the art world? Will artists start to incorporate text and hands with the right amount of fingers into everything they do? Maybe human artists scede all digital media to AI, instead focusing on physical pieces.

    • Ilflish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Simpler jobs. There’s doomerism among the discussion of AI and it seems like there are three camps. People who are scared of AI based on movies. People who have technical knowledge and know machines are still stupid, and people with knowledge who know some fuckwit with too much power is going to give the AI access with too much power. Just don’t give them access to nuke codes

    • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Maybe human artists scede all digital media to AI, instead focusing on physical pieces.

      Until some asshole hooks up a Nueral Network to a CNC machine and churns out 10 billion sculptures a month.

  • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I really love bladerunner but it has no ties to reality. Other than the dystopian shit.

  • anteaters@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    He might want to ask an AI about the historical events that inspired his fantasy movie so he understands why people criticize him for it.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    AI will probably be the final and ultimate achievement of humanity. When we have created true strong AI, the path is clearly towards the irrelevancy of human kind.
    It’s not that we will cease to exist, but we will not remain top of the ladder for long after that. Our significance will be comparable to dogs.

    • Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      AI is just humanity evolved. Why be afraid of a better humanity? We don’t need to be flesh beings thrust out into this world from a wet slimy torn vagina or incision in the abdomen of a woman who severely regretted getting pregnant.

      How is this existence better than what humanity will he through AI?

      AI ARE our children.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I never claimed any emotional attachment to human kind being dominant.

        I think chances are good AI will still help us, even when machine intelligence doesn’t need humanity anymore. Kind of like how we try to preserve history and nature we find worthy.

        The above is by no means a doomsday prediction, but rather my understanding of how things will naturally evolve.
        We may prolong our relevance with implants, but ultimately that too will be inferior to self improving AI.
        We can absolutely call AI our children, and our children will surpass us.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think AI advances will continue to be just fast enough to have occasional “punctuation points” of short-lived buzz in the media. For example, I can see it getting good enough (and easy enough to use) that average normies will be able to create their own movies and games with it.

    But, AI advances will remain slow enough to lull people into apathy about it (like global warming). It will very gradually encroach into more and more embedded systems, infrastructure, and cloud resources.

    And at some point after that, it will accelerate in sudden and unexpected ways. I don’t know if it will be a good thing or a bad thing when that happens. But considering how many tech bros and executives are sociopaths with no ethics, I’m not very optimistic it will be a good thing.

  • OrteilGenou@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Yes, the systems that we created and control are running rampant. Did you see the Spanish model? There’ll be an army of incels worshipping ChatGPT by week’s end! RUN!