Mr Andreessen makes no effort to persuade the reader who is skeptical of AI. Instead, he writes to dismiss the skeptic as a conspiracy theorist or an ignoramus. His article drips with condescension. It's clear that he has not tried to learn about the real reasons people fear AI. For example, something being "math and code" made by humans…
Mr Andreessen makes no effort to persuade the reader who is skeptical of AI. Instead, he writes to dismiss the skeptic as a conspiracy theorist or an ignoramus. His article drips with condescension. It's clear that he has not tried to learn about the real reasons people fear AI. For example, something being "math and code" made by humans and not "alive" does not mean it is incapable of having goals. The fact that he brushes aside the argument that AI could develop goals (or just take very seriously the goals given by humans, in a way unconstrained by human sense and morality - see Bostrom's paperclip maximizer thought experiment) with "but it's not alive" shows just how ignorant he is of the threat we face with AI. He clearly enjoyed knocking down the strawmen he built. I also laughed when he wrote that coastal elites do not represent humanity and don't get to decide what happens... Folks who don't know who Marc Andreessen is need to look him up. Pot calling the kettle black! And that's not to even mention his immense conflict of interest as a venture capitalist backing tech firms who develop AI. Take this essay with a planet-sized grain of salt.
Mr Andreessen makes no effort to persuade the reader who is skeptical of AI. Instead, he writes to dismiss the skeptic as a conspiracy theorist or an ignoramus. His article drips with condescension. It's clear that he has not tried to learn about the real reasons people fear AI. For example, something being "math and code" made by humans and not "alive" does not mean it is incapable of having goals. The fact that he brushes aside the argument that AI could develop goals (or just take very seriously the goals given by humans, in a way unconstrained by human sense and morality - see Bostrom's paperclip maximizer thought experiment) with "but it's not alive" shows just how ignorant he is of the threat we face with AI. He clearly enjoyed knocking down the strawmen he built. I also laughed when he wrote that coastal elites do not represent humanity and don't get to decide what happens... Folks who don't know who Marc Andreessen is need to look him up. Pot calling the kettle black! And that's not to even mention his immense conflict of interest as a venture capitalist backing tech firms who develop AI. Take this essay with a planet-sized grain of salt.