Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Google is in the best position of anyone/any company to cause an AI disaster.

Are you serious ? Let's not overstate Google's position in this world.

They have a search engine, mobile platform, advertising platform and a bunch of popular websites. That's it. All of which have been done before for a decade now. Nothing they do directly influences whether people live or die.

I would be far more concerned about something like IBM Watson used in health care situations.



> They have a search engine, mobile platform, advertising platform and a bunch of popular websites. That's it. All of which have been done before for a decade now.

Also best and brightest of engineers and AI researchers, shitload of money, culture of ambition and a clear intent to go after AI tech. I haven't heard of any other company like that.

> I would be far more concerned about something like IBM Watson used in health care situations.

I'd actually welcome it with open hands. It's about time for some automated diagnosis.

EDIT I'm sorry but I do have to address this point.

> Nothing they do directly influences whether people live or die.

Shut down Google and see what happens. Huge sectors of economy depend directly on search ability they provide, not to mention how many people are now using GMail. Moreover: do you know the addresses of nearest hospitals? Phones to medical specialists? How do you navigate around places? Without Google we'd be all back to Yellow Pages.

If there's one company humanity really grew dependent on, it's Google. Yes, you could probably replace most of the services if needed, given enough time, but the fact is they're the best out there right now, we're all using them and they definitely influence our lives and deaths.


>Also best and brightest of engineers and AI researchers, shitload of money, culture of ambition and a clear intent to go after AI tech. I haven't heard of any other company like that.

IBM ? Who also have been doing it for decades and are far ahead of Google from all indictions.

>I'd actually welcome it with open hands. It's about time for some automated diagnosis.

My point was that IBM Watson if it made wrong decisions could directly influence health care outcomes i.e. life or death. Nothing Google does is comparable.

> Shut down Google and see what happens. Huge sectors of economy depend directly on search ability they provide, not to mention how many people are now using GMail.

Google is not the first or last search or email company. We would simply switch to Bing and Yahoo and the world moves on. Or have you never heard of Altavista, Excite, Lycos ?

> Without Google we'd be all back to Yellow Pages.

Hilarious you mention that since that's where Google gets its worldwide Local/Places search content from. So in fact we are already using Yellow Pages.

>If there's one company humanity really grew dependent on, it's Google.

Humanity doesn't depend on Google. Get a grip would you.


I would argue the risks involved in creating a "real" AI are present regardless. Not to re-link, but this example is even more apropos to your question than my other answer in this post.

http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Paperclip_maximizer


AI is just smarter software at the end of the day. The risks are still far greater for a simple control system used in a Boeing 777 or heart pacemaker than for an AI search engine.

It's all about Risk Management 101: Risk = Impact x Probability.


Right, when the impact is calamity, and the probability is high, risk is astronomical. Which is why I'm bothering to make this point in the first place. See the other arguments in this thread as to why, with an intelligent AI, what it starts out controlling is unlikely to have any bearing on what it is capable of gaining control of... In risk management terms this is about as serious as it gets.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: