In case it wasn’t already clear… I’m new at this whole social media outreach thing. But the message is more important than the messenger’s insecurities, so I’m working it anyway, knowing that eventually I’ll get better at it… after failing enough times.
So, I have three important announcements, all about podcasting.
Blaine is a friend of several years now and he is one of the most thoughtful, practically compassionate business consultants I know. He coaches top companies and their executives on how to be good and do good, while remaining competitive and relevant within a challenging world.
Second, I was Tom Dutta’s guest on his Quiet Warrior Show on June 16:
Tom spoke after me at TedXBearCreekPark, and embodies vulnerability in a good cause. He speaks candidly about his history with mental health and works to relieve the stigma that keeps executives from seeking help.
And finally… the very first episodes of my own podcast are nearly ready to be released! On Monday, June 22, at 10 am Pacific Time, the first episode of AI and You will appear. I’m still figuring this podcasting thing out, so if you’ve been down this road before and can see where I’m making some mistakes… let me know! Show link.
Regarding the section on AI on the battlefield you rightly focus on it behaving ethically against troops/citizens on the other side. However, very likely in the future the enemy ‘troops’ on the other side will be AI entities. It might be interesting to explore the ethics rules in this case?
Heh, very good point. Of course, at some point, the AI entities will be sufficiently conscious as to deserve equal rights. Who knows, they may be granted those rights by opposing AIs somewhat before then under professional courtesy. But your question suggests a more pragmatic earlier timeframe. In that view, the AI doesn’t recognize another AI as having any rights; it’s just aware that it’s looking at something that is not-a-human.
Before AIs escape their programming, we assume that their programming will only grant special status to human life. (Will autonomous cars brake for cats? Squirrels? Mice?) We have to postulate a level of AI development that’s capable of making value judgements by association before things get interesting. Imagine an AI that could evaluate the strategic consequences of destroying an opposing AI. Is its opponent directing the actions of inferior units? Will destroying its opponent be interpreted as a new act of war? Of course, these are decisions that human field troops are not empowered to make. But in an AI-powered battlefield, there may be no need to distinguish between the front lines and the upper echelons. They may be connected well enough to rewrite strategy on the fly.
I’d like to think that when the AIs get smart enough, they will decide that fighting each other is wasteful and instead negotiate a treaty that eluded their human masters. But before we get to that point we’re far more likely to be dealing with AIs with a programmed penchant for destruction.