Lumifer comments on How can I reduce existential risk from AI? - Less Wrong

46 Post author: lukeprog 13 November 2012 09:56PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (92)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lumifer 19 May 2015 11:52:34PM 0 points [-]

is voting in elections a viable method of decreasing existential risk

No.

Comment author: G0W51 24 May 2015 01:45:45AM *  0 points [-]

Why not? I imagine that different political parties have different views on what the government should do about existential risk and voting for the ones that are potentially more willing to decrease it would be beneficial. Currently, it seems like most parties don't concern themselves at all with existential risk, but perhaps this will change once strong AI becomes less far off.

Comment author: Lumifer 27 May 2015 04:47:35PM 4 points [-]

I imagine that different political parties have different views on what the government should do about existential risk

Actually, no, I don't think it is true. I suspect that at the moment the views of all political parties on existential risk are somewhere between "WTF is that?" and "Can I use it to influence my voters?"

That may (or may not) eventually change, but at the moment the answer is a clear "No".

Comment author: G0W51 09 October 2015 05:59:31AM 0 points [-]

Some parties may be more likely to accelerate scientific progress than others, and those who do could decrease existential risk by decreasing the time spent in high-risk states, for example the period when there are dangerous nano-technological weapons but other astronomical objects have not be colonized. This probably is not enough to justify voting, but I thought I would just let you know.

Comment author: G0W51 30 May 2015 10:48:52PM 0 points [-]

Noted. I'll invest my efforts on x-risk reduction into something other than voting.

Comment author: ChristianKl 24 May 2015 01:17:49PM 1 point [-]

I imagine that different political parties have different views on what the government should do about existential risk

Do you? I think most politicians would ask "What do you mean with 'existential risk'?" is you ask them about it.

Comment author: G0W51 25 May 2015 02:22:39AM 0 points [-]

Yeah, I suppose you're right. Still, once something that could pose a large existential risk comes into existence or looks like it will soon come into existence, wouldn't politicians then consider existential risk reduction? For example, once a group is on the verge of developing AGI, wouldn't the government think about what to do about it? Or would they still ignore it? Would the responses of different parties vary?

You could definitely be correct, though; I'm not knowledgeable about politics.

Comment author: ChristianKl 25 May 2015 12:51:21PM 0 points [-]

Politics is a people sport. Depending on who creates the policy of the party in the time the topic comes up, the results can come out very differently.