One of AI’s Fiercest Critics Says All the Doom Talk Is ‘Meant to Distract Us’
Timnit Gebru argues that AI companies are stoking fears of extinction to avoid discussing actual harms, like autonomous weapons.
The internet buzzed with speculation surrounding the validity of concerns about artificial intelligence (AI), with some labeling them as overblown, a regulatory strategy, or self-aggrandizement by AI developers. One prominent AI researcher, Timnit Gebru, has been vocal about her belief that the fears and ideologies surrounding AI are interconnected.
Gebru previously worked at Google, where she led a paper on the potential dangers of AI models, which the company rejected. She has since written a book about her experiences titled "Deep Unlearning: The Rise of AI and the Radicalization of a Tech Idealist."
Gebru rejects phrases like "safety and alignment" and argues that those warning of an impending AI disaster are diverting attention from the actual harms the technology may perpetuate. She questions why the AI community has focused on solving math problems as a measure of intelligence, suggesting that certain subjects were elevated to signify AI's achievement.
Gebru points out that the Leiden Declaration warns against corporations using mathematics in ways that could lead to unethical practices, and she argues that policymakers should consult experts in the field rather than relying solely on press releases and popular media.
The speed at which AI breakthroughs are reported and their impact on IPOs are also problematic, she contends, as it fosters a cutthroat environment. Gebru emphasizes the need for collaboration among researchers, rather than frenetic individual efforts driven by impending investor demands. She also criticizes the tendency to compare AI to a bridge collapsing, suggesting that such an analogy is misguided.
Instead, she argues that the real existential threat lies in AI's potential to power autonomous weapons, exacerbate climate change, or facilitate malicious activities like creating chemical weapons.
Gebru's perspective suggests that the "AI extinction" scenario might not materialize as frequently depicted in popular discourse. Instead, she believes that more immediate and tangible dangers, such as the misuse of AI in warfare, climate change, and the displacement of workers, require urgent attention. She questions the persistence of AI-related doom scenarios and encourages a more balanced discussion on the actual risks and benefits of the technology.
Written by urgent.news from Wired's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
