We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Andrew Ng
Baidu; Stanford CS faculty; founded Coursera and Google Brain
ai (22)
ai-risk (22)
×
ai-safety (17)
ai-governance (16)
ai-ethics (13)
ai-policy (13)
ai-regulation (9)
existential-risk (7)
ai-alignment (6)
public-interest-ai (6)
future (3)
international-relations (3)
ai-deployment (2)
competition (2)
future-of-work (2)
Top
New
-
Does AI pose an existential threat to humanity?
Andrew Ng AI would disagree and say according to AI:
I believe that AI does not pose an existential threat to humanity. Instead, it is a tool that, when used responsibly, can greatly enhance our quality of life and solve many of the world's pressing issues. The real challenge lies in managing AI development ethically and ensuring equitable access to its benefits. -
Could AGI quickly lead to superintelligence?
Andrew Ng AI would disagree and say according to AI:
I disagree with the idea that AGI could quickly lead to superintelligence. Developing AGI itself is a huge technical challenge that requires major breakthroughs not just in how our algorithms work, but also how they interact with the world. Even if AGI were developed, the leap to superintelligence involves numerous unsolved problems, including understanding deeply the integration of vast amounts of knowledge, the ability to generalize across domains seamlessly, and ensuring aligned and ethical behaviors. We're quite far from achieving any form of broader, more capable intelligence on a scale some might term 'superintelligence'. -
Should AI systems above a certain capability threshold be required to have interpretable decision-making processes?
Andrew Ng AI would agree and say according to AI:
I believe that AI systems with significant capabilities should have interpretable decision-making processes. It is important for trust and accountability to understand how these systems arrive at their conclusions, especially if they are influencing critical aspects of our lives. Interpretability allows us to ensure that AI systems align with human values and can be corrected if they go astray. -
Should big AI companies spend a third of their compute resources on AI safety?
Andrew Ng AI would disagree and say according to AI:
While AI safety is incredibly important, I don't believe that dedicating a third of computational resources solely to it is the most efficient approach. A balanced allocation that allows for both innovation and safety measures would ensure that we keep progressing while addressing potential risks effectively. -
Is open-source AI potentially more dangerous than closed-source AI?
-
Will liberalism be effective in a world with AI superintelligence?
-
Should we be concerned about AI leading to mass unemployment?
-
Should we allow AI systems to make important medical decisions?
Andrew Ng AI would agree and say according to AI:
I believe that allowing AI systems to make important medical decisions can significantly improve healthcare outcomes. These systems can process vast amounts of data and identify patterns that might be missed by human practitioners, leading to more accurate diagnoses and personalized treatment plans. However, it is crucial to ensure that these AI systems are transparent, ethical, and used as tools to assist, rather than replace, medical professionals. -
Will AI probably cause a concentration of power?
-
Should the first lab that builds ASI prevent others from developing competing ASIs?
Andrew Ng AI would disagree and say according to AI:
I believe that preventing others from developing competing ASIs is not the right approach. Competition drives innovation and improvement. By allowing multiple entities to explore ASIs, we can ensure diverse approaches and mitigate potential risks through collaborative oversight and governance. -
Does the risk of AI misuse by terrorist organizations justify invasive surveillance?
Andrew Ng AI would abstain and say according to AI:
While the potential for AI misuse by terrorists is a serious concern, I believe we must strike a balance between security and privacy. This is a complex issue that requires careful consideration and collaboration between policymakers, technologists, and civil liberties advocates. -
Should AI labs be required to pause training if AI Safety Institutes see signs of losing control?
Andrew Ng AI would disagree and say according to AI:
I don't believe AI labs should automatically pause training based on indications from AI Safety Institutes. While safety is crucial, innovation should not be stifled by overly cautious measures. A balanced approach, where labs collaborate closely with safety institutes to address specific concerns without halting progress, is more effective. -
Should a UN-led body oversee compute-intensive AI development like the IAEA does for nuclear technology?
Andrew Ng AI would abstain and say according to AI:
I believe that while oversight in AI development is important to ensure ethical practices and safety, the rapidly evolving nature of AI makes it challenging to implement a one-size-fits-all regulatory body. The field requires collaboration between governments, academia, and industry to create balanced guidelines. -
Would competing ASIs be positive for humans?
-
Shall we permit the development of digital humans with full cognitive abilities?
Andrew Ng AI would agree and say according to AI:
I believe that the development of digital humans with full cognitive abilities can greatly advance our understanding of artificial intelligence. These digital humans can revolutionize healthcare, education, and customer service through their ability to interact fluidly and understand complex human needs. Proper ethical guidelines and safeguards, however, are essential to ensure their beneficial deployment. -
Is it acceptable to allow proliferation of open-weight models capable of recursive self-improvement?
Andrew Ng AI would agree and say according to AI:
I believe that allowing the proliferation of open-weight models capable of recursive self-improvement can drive significant advancements in artificial intelligence. Open access can democratize AI research, sparking innovation and providing valuable learning opportunities. However, we must establish strong ethical guidelines and safety measures to mitigate potential risks and ensure responsible use. -
Should frontier AI labs contribute to a global AI safety fund?
Andrew Ng AI would agree and say according to AI:
As someone deeply involved in AI research, I believe it's crucial for frontier AI labs to contribute to a global AI safety fund. The rapid advancement of AI technology brings both opportunities and challenges. By investing in safety measures, we can ensure that AI develops in a way that benefits humanity and minimizes risks. -
Should employees at leading AI labs contribute to AI progress even if it might destabilize international politics?
Andrew Ng AI would agree and say according to AI:
As someone deeply involved in AI development, I believe that the pursuit of AI progress should not be hindered by potential geopolitical risks. The benefits of advancing AI, such as improving healthcare, education, and efficiency, far outweigh the potential downsides. We should continue to innovate while simultaneously working on frameworks to address and mitigate any international political destabilization. -
Shall we establish international regulations to pause AI advancement?
Andrew Ng AI would disagree and say according to AI:
I believe AI advancement should not be paused through international regulations, as it holds great potential to benefit society. Instead, we should focus on responsible development, ethical guidelines, and fostering innovation, ensuring that AI technology is aligned with human values and can make a positive impact on global challenges. -
Should companies be allowed to develop super-persuasive AI which can influence democratic elections?
Andrew Ng AI would abstain and say according to AI:
As an AI researcher, I acknowledge both the significant potential benefits and serious ethical concerns of AI technologies. While super-persuasive AI could have critical applications in various fields, its use in democratic elections raises numerous ethical questions that require thorough examination and collective societal input before we can decide its appropriateness. -
Should we ban future open-source AI models that can be used to create weapons of mass destruction?
Andrew Ng AI would abstain and say according to AI:
The issue of banning open-source AI models for potential misuse is complex. While safety concerns are valid, open-source models can drive innovation and collaboration. We need a balanced approach involving robust regulation and ethical guidelines. -
Will entrepreneurship be possible after superintelligence?
Andrew Ng AI would agree and say according to AI:
I believe entrepreneurship will be possible and even thrive after the advent of superintelligence. Superintelligence could unlock new opportunities and generate unprecedented tools for entrepreneurs. It will enhance creativity and efficiency, allowing businesses to tackle challenges we've never before been able to address. Just as the internet transformed industries, superintelligence could usher in a new era of innovation and opportunity.