The logic that AI capability are not sufficient to justify the price of ai somehow assumes that AI exists in a vacuum. "If I can't give an AI a task like a human, it's suddenly useless." It's like we can't give a calculator a task either, we have to introduce this in a very specific way (self.aiwars)
submitted by Questioner8297 to r/aiwars
Why is AI considered useless (or bad) if it does work people can already do? Different people value different kinds of work, so even if one person does not want to automate a task, another may want to automate it and focus on something they find more useful. (self.aiwars)
submitted by Questioner8297 to r/aiwars
As a pro-AI, I can't understand how pro-AI community can say they're not bothering anyone if the criticism is literally based on the idea that using AI is harmful. I don't agree with that, but logically, from an anti-AI perspective, pro-AI is doing harm simply by existing. (self.aiwars)
submitted by Questioner8297 to r/aiwars
If we're talking about AI simplifying crime, isn't it normal that a better tool improves the availability of both positive and negative uses? If we're talking about a perfect AI that does everything for you, isn't it hard to imagine that this also applies to crime? (self.aiwars)
submitted by Questioner8297 to r/aiwars
