Warnings about the enormous dangers of artificial intelligence are warranted, but mere calls for “regulations” are empty. The question is not whether regulatory regimes are needed, but how to control the uses to which A.I. can be put.
Anything human or nonhuman that is capable of creative thought is also capable of creating mechanisms for self-preservation, for survival. The quest for a “precision regulation approach to A.I.” is likely to prove elusive.
Norman Cousins, Carl Sagan, Alvin Toffler and many others have presciently warned that technological advances provided both a cure to some of humanity’s afflictions and a curse, potentially threatening human existence.
One doomsday scenario would be for tech scientists to ask A.I. itself for methods to control its use and abuse, only to receive a chilling reply: “Nice try!”
Charles Kegley is an Emeritus professor of international relations at University of South Carolina. He lives in Cobblestone Park in Blythewood.
This letter appeared in the Op/Ed section of the New York Times on Saturday, May 27.
