> The error is on two levels: you are using too much analogy with other technologies. And you are writing off the possibility of stopping ai when it’s still not clear that it can’t be stopped.
No. What I am saying is that it's impossible to centrally control the actions of 7.7 billion free humans. A lot of them will disagree with your position (and any other position as well).
By trying to "put a stop to it" in a central manner, you are only making it harder (but not impossible) for some subset to learn about this phenomenon, to improve on it and to understand its strengths and weaknesses.
I am unconvinced by your argument that we could reliably detect, much less stop, attempts to train a large and useful machine learning model.
No. What I am saying is that it's impossible to centrally control the actions of 7.7 billion free humans. A lot of them will disagree with your position (and any other position as well).
By trying to "put a stop to it" in a central manner, you are only making it harder (but not impossible) for some subset to learn about this phenomenon, to improve on it and to understand its strengths and weaknesses.
I am unconvinced by your argument that we could reliably detect, much less stop, attempts to train a large and useful machine learning model.