570 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

Yeah, sorry, but those were all races. The electricity race was won by Britain and you saw several people racing to catch up like Austria or later Germany. While eventually it evened out that took decades. The auto race was won by the United States and the loss was so humiliating that Hitler claimed to have redeemed Germany from the defeat. And the computer race was again won by the United States with the Soviet Union raising the white flag in the '70s by deciding to steal western designs instead of continuing to develop their own.

(Also nukes were not a binary technology. Development both of different kinds of bombs and delivery mechanisms continues to this day! And was very intense during the Cold War.)

I get you really want the answer to be something else because this is a point against what you want to be true. But you're abandoning your normally excellent reasoning to do so. The proper answer for your concerns, as I said several threads ago, is to boost AI research by people who agree with you as much as possible. Because being very far ahead in the race means you have space to slow down and do things like safety. This was the case with US nuclear, for example, where being so far ahead meant the US was able to develop safety protocols which it then encouraged (or "encouraged") other people to adopt.

And yes, with nuclear you had Chernobyl. But AI is less likely to result in this scenario because it's more winner take all. We're not going to build hundreds of evenly spaced AIs. The best AI will eat the worse ones. If the US has a super AI that's perfectly aligned and China has an inferior AI that's not well aligned then the aligned AI will (presumably) just win the struggle and humanity will continue on.

Expand full comment