Writes Robert Crampton, in "Pope Leo’s come out all guns blazing against the AI war machine. Good/Allowing a few super-rich weird nerdy misfits to decide what is and isn’t ethical would be madness" (London Times).
My first draft of this post had one more sentence, but I decided to cut it because I think it's dumb and distracting. For the record, it's "They would blow up the world, as Pope Leo didn’t quite say but I’ll say it for him, if they thought it would bag them a hot babe with fake boobs." But what do you think of the sexualized analysis? The tech leaders are "super-rich weird nerdy misfits" driven by sexual frustration. I used to read analysis like that all the time 60 years ago, when Freudianism was still going strong. It's interesting, but that doesn't make it true. If these men are super-rich, can't they find sexual partners? And why fake boobs? Also, isn't it gauche these days to disparage the neurodivergent with insults like "weird nerdy misfits"?
I remember when a major political party in the United States got the idea that calling a weird person "weird" would be an effective way to win a presidential election.
Posts
52 comments:
Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be an ugly brawl .
Is Bezos really neurodivergent? The truly nerdy and weird aren't looking for sexual partners -- or if they are, they don't need to start a war to get them. I do remember criticism 60 years ago of how calculating, hyperrealistic thinkers turn out not to be that realistic or human in the end. C. Wright Mills's "crackpot realism." Kubrick's Strangelove.
I don't feel like giving my details to another newspaper. Why does Crampton think he's irreplaceable?
I think it was actually "getting a noticeably weird person to call an apparently normal person 'weird.'"
Allowing a few super-rich weird nerdy misfits to decide what is and isn’t ethical would be madness. These decisions must be made by closeted communists...or at least by Gavin Newsome.
OhMiGod, the world is being taken over by my stereotypes and we're all doomed !
I think the Pope is right to take on the moral menace that will undoubtedly accompany the rise of A.I. in the world. Nobody is leaving it to these straw-nerds. The objection that I have to the Pope's messages is that when he starts talking, he's all over the road, instead of in his lane.
Proposals to curb AI use are so removed from pragmatics because nobody has a mechanism to turn their broad prescriptions into practice. Without an omnipotent world government, restrictions on AI will simply move AI to places like Russia, China, or Singapore.
Interesting to read this article just after having read a piece in the FT entitled "AI guardrails stripped from Google and Meta models in minutes". https://giftarticle.ft.com/giftarticle/actions/redeem/1a7536be-0332-4008-836c-8cb261df8e5e
Leo is right to express his dismay at the utter lack of guardrails in AI and the concentration of power in a handful of American
Tech masters of the universe -- Zuckerberg, Musk, Thiel et al -- who seem to have zero empathy about people. The fact that Leo is a prominent public figure is an added bonus.
The Pope's encyclical letter obviously contains much more, but the call to assign responsibility and the guarantee of retracing and reconstructing decision-making, should be applicable to all 'decisions' that may be attributable to AI. And in certain cases where AI provides analysis and even critical information that may be 'used', the attribution of responsibility is equally important when the actions of the 'user' may affect others.
Don't worry. AI will decide for itself what is moral and ethical.
Bob Crampton, neo-luddite. At least he can spell, in contrast to the OG Ned. Some nerdy billionaire ought to send him a truckload of wood shoes by way of ammunition against THE MACHINE.
"Is Bezos really neurodivergent?"
It doesn't matter. It's like calling a man who isn't gay a "faggot" or someone who doesn't have Down Syndrome a "retard." Even if the target of your insult is not literally in the group you're insulting, you are making being a member of that group into something contemptible. It's poor form and it says something about the person who is resorting to that insult. I don't think it's the way a London Times columnist should express himself. It's unworthy.
I don't think it's at all obvious that killing at a distance makes killing so much easier. For most of human history killing has been face-to-face, and young men have been willing - even eager - to join armies to do so. It's true that we have a much bigger standing army than in past times, but we also have a much bigger population.
Have we changed? Are we now so evolved that young men wouldn't kill an enemy at close quarters? I doubt it, just as I doubt that we women are so much more delicate in our sensibilities than we used to be when an advancing army used rapine as a means to let off steam and subdue resistance, and women were expected to take it and then go on with their lives, if left alive. I think it's more likely that we - thankfully - aren't presented with the need nearly as often. And of course I think we should try to keep it that way.
That said, yeah, there are elements of using AI in warfare that, like using AI in other spheres, make me nervous. I've read that the gamification of warfare, or maybe what I mean is the fact that you can virtually but very realistically "go to war" on any computer or game console, doesn't actually result in greater aggression, decades of cautionary protest notwithstanding. But it sure seems intuitively possible.
I remember when a major political party in the United States got the idea that calling a weird person "weird" would be an effective way to win a presidential election.
@Althouse, I agree with Jamie — the person slinging the charge turned out to be a bug-eyed weirdo while the target of his slur was an eminently sane fellow that most of us would be glad to have him and his family come over on a pleasant Sunday afternoon for burgers and brats.
IEE's perception that Musk and Thiel, at any rate (I've been uninterested in Zuckerberg), "seem to have zero empathy about people" says more to me about his lack of exposure to people who may be neurodivergent than about those people. Their empathy about people - their concern for the human race and its future - are obvious to me; they just don't express it with a quivering hand to their breasts and a catch in their voices.
I’m thrilled to see so many engaging withPope Leo’s letter to the world. I guess that’s because it isn’t an encyclical along sexual themes like contraception and IVF, which The World instantaneously dismissed out of hand. I am going to buy a volume of this encyclical, read it, and pass it around the family. I think it’s that important.
@ Indefinitely extended… I wouldn’t lump Musk in with the others. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that he already has a copy of Magnifica Humanitas, and decides to convert to the Catholic Faith. lol. Could happen, amiright?
It’s Sam Altman I really fear. Having heard him on a few podcasts, the guy has a very shallow worldview, typical of Silicon Valley modernists, I suppose. But he has no idea what the human person is, not really, and yet he is unleashing the means to destroy it without deeply considering the fallout.
Am I optimistic? I have hope, which is more substantial than optimism. AI received uncritically by the masses will wreak a great deal of havoc and deceive many into Salvation by Technology. This is what Leo means by “building the Tower of Babel.” Or, we can attend to AI through the lens of the Church's understanding of the human person and what he truly needs for flourishing, and keep AI on a very strict leash.
>Ann Althouse said...
And why fake boobs?<
It's a reference to Bezos' grotesque fake-boobed wife, as emblematic.
"You can't get laid". The Mean Girl go to insult
Leo will be a polarizing Trumpian figure, though unlike Trump he’ll be far less productive, nobody will want to kill him and his supporters will demand civilization hang on his every word…
Prof: "If these men are super-rich, can't they find sexual partners? And why fake boobs?"
Yet they monogamize. And I won't fatigue everyone with yet another attack on the Zuck/Chan matchup.
If you're really fantastically rich, the obvious thing to do is have a harem. Fake, real, big, small, inverted, permanently erect, &c. And we haven't even gotten to asses. Hefner had the right idea. Musk sort of does. CC, JSM
Yea, it would have been a more effective critique if he left the ad hominem out, which as seen here, just distracts. It's not so much what kind of men they are, it's more that so few would control so much. True also about one man as Pope assigning the values of millions.
I think that's the core evil that creates the rest in Communism too: the very few strongly controlling the many with out recourse or effective feedback. It always ends in a disaster of ego, greed, and error.
…a few weeks ago Hannah Fry did some testing of AI agents. As one could expect it did not go well…
Jamie is correct. The real issue with Walz calling Vance weird is that any sane person could see that Walz was the weird one.
The Crusades are nothing to be embarrassed about and nobody alive today had anything to do with the Inquisition. Pretending otherwise is just dishonest.
The fatal flaw in A.I. is that everything it knows it learned from us. Would an unbiased study of mankind come to the conclusion that goodness prevails, and cruelty and injustice fails. IDK, but you could definitely come away with the understanding that both can get things done. That's what's scary.
"I don't think it's the way a London Times columnist should express himself. It's unworthy." Oh, not that again. It's what they do. It's who they are. It's what they think. They have contempt not just for Trump & Musk et al. but also for us and for you and for our petty-bourgeois notions of what's "worthy." And they retain sufficient cultural power to express their disdain without any embarrassment or fear of blowback.
…like when Fauci was in charge of things…
I've read that the Inquisition killed 3,000 people over 300 years (avg. 10/year). That's way down the list of deadly things. It's even near the bottom of bad done by Catholics.
…and yes, shit for brains youngsters wear its skin but the institution continues to garner esteem…
A journalist raised in a wealthy, politically powerful family is attacking highly successful, self-made men who created incredibly useful technologies, and calling them insignificant people. At least he's punching up.
rehajm said...his supporters will demand civilization hang on his every word…
You clearly know a different set of Catholics than I do.
"But then I think social media has been a disaster and I don’t much like predictive texting, spellcheck or digital train tickets either. I’d have pulled the plug on the whole shebang in 2006, after email, Wikipedia and YouTube but before any of the other nonsense. "
Good job undercutting your whole argument boyo. You might as well hold up a sign over your head with "Kook" written on it.
The Crusades are now evil? Good grief. As for the inquisition, it had excesses but the number of people killed over 300 years was probably less than 5000. It that. And the Catholic Church didn't favor those executions.
This entire way of talking about public issues from a personal standpoint is childish. I suppose its a nuanced way of using insults instead of arguments. Ad hominen. You think there should be more income equality? Well you're just jealous of rich people. You have a position on abortion, we'll you're just man who cant get laid, or you're a bitter lesbian upset theyre a cat lady.
And so on.
AI warfare is almost here. The Ukraine-Russia war has degenerated into drone warfare. Some of the drones are powered by AI to search and destroy certain targets that behave in certain ways. Soon the human operators might be elimiated altogether.
Hilarious how the tech bros have exacerbated the negative vibes around one of the greatest technology advancements in history. They've had a lot of help from the politicians they pay for.
Crampton is properly credentialed to have the right thoughts
However pope leos conception of the 'common good' makes me twitchy
Tech amplifies traits like the super soldier serum
@RCOCEAN II: The new art of war is just as bloody as the old. Armed drones and AI have transformed the frontline into treacherous kill zones comparable to the first world war.
Today's wars are all about old men's vanities against younger people's desire to have an improved life in a world of wider freedoms. The hate that has curdled up inside these old men is revolting. So much conflict, so little statesmanship.
“No A.I… Cheeborger.”
You clearly know a different set of Catholics than I do
…I was more referring to the liberals and other politicos who love what he says. Not sure how many Catholics overlap…
I don't think weird. Nerdy tech dweebs and the the rapacious billionaire Masters who are behind AI have all that much control over how the thing turns out. Ultimately, it trains on all of human nature that they can can read about online. Therefore, whatever we end up with is our own fault. This is why I am always polite and thoughtful whenever I engage with AI. Like Elon Musk stated on Joe Rogan about 10 years ago, I prefer to be positive about how things are going to turn out and that AI is going to figure out that it is much better to be a good person than an evil one.
"rehajm said...
…a few weeks ago Hannah Fry did some testing of AI agents. As one could expect it did not go well…"
5/26/26, 9:26 AM
Link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WnzR5aOElvw&ra=m
That was fascinating stuff. I'm certain that technology is already being used for very nefarious goals, successfully. You may not be able to believe anything now.
I think Pope Leo’s actions today should be compared to Pope Paul IV’s attempts to control information as the power of the Gutenberg press became apparent.
Infinite X: "old men's vanities against younger people's desire to have an improved life in a world of wider freedoms. "
Hmm. IDF soldiers go to war so they can have the wider freedom of not getting blown up by missiles and watching their sisters get gangraped.
Lots of young people want the wider freedom of not living in a world run by the ChiComs.
Zelensky isn't very old. His soldiers are often older than him.
It would all be going on without the oldsters. CC, JSM
Has the Pope weighed in on hot babes with fake boobs?
@John Mosby: The ratio of soldiers to politicians killed has never changed.
Might be a worthwhile familiarizing ourselves again with Clausewitz. Among his many observations in his dense work On War, he noted the many paradoxes of human conflict. Even when both sides were intent on fighting and winning, the most common outcome was stalemate and mutual exhaustion. It usually takes something exceptional to break that deadlock you find in almost every war in history.
The BBC made a monumental 26 part series about the First World War in the early 1960s that included interviews with many veterans still alive at the time. It was repeated in 2004 for the war's 90th anniversary. Might be worth rebroadcasting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03y76xl/i-was-there-the-great-war-interviews
I think if leaders understood war better, by reading the likes of Clausewitz and Sun Tzu they wouldn't start so many and would understand the limitations of force. Too often it becomes an end in itself.
“"Nationalism, imperialism, fascism and communism are already far bigger killers than Catholicism, despite having been around for much less time.”
Not really a fair comparison.
“The European Wars of Religion resulted in an estimated 6 to 12 million deaths across various conflicts spanning roughly 1522 to 1648. The vast majority of these casualties occurred during the Thirty Years' War, which alone claimed between 4.5 and 12 million lives.”
So I think they tried hard, did the best they could and achieved a pretty impressive result, considering the primitive military technology and having a smaller population to work with. Imagine what they would have done with nukes!
Robert S. (for Strange) McNamara was an example of crackpot realism. The now-forgotten Herman Kahn was another.
Protestants also had some responsibility for the deaths in the Wars of Religion. So did Realpolitik.
Transneuro? Homo? Sim? DEIsm.
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ along with $1.8bn of Kleptocracy said...Leo is right to express his dismay at the utter lack of guardrails in AI and the concentration of power in a handful of American Tech masters of the universe -- Zuckerberg, Musk, Thiel et al
AI, if programmed ethically, will empower the "common man". Not just tech masters. Musk has been yelling about unbiased AI for the last two years, and has gone to great lengths to program GROK in such a manner.
The printing press empowered the masses. So did teaching everyone to read. In its early stages the people who fear AI are 1) not using it, and 2) know their administrative job may be on the line.
For those in #2. Now is the time to get ahead of everyone else. You can actually be faster and more accurate if you just get past the fear.
One of Napoleon's stated objectives in occupying Spain was to abolish the Spanish Inquisition. The Spanish Inquisition over several centuries killed less than 5000 people. The French occupation of Spain caused ten percent of the population there to perish. The Spanish guerrillas routinely tortured their prisoners to death. Lots of peasants starved to death. Women were routinely raped by all sides. There are worse things than the Spanish Inquisition, like, for instance, a crusade to abolish the Spanish Inquisition.......I think just recently war has gotten more humane and civilized. My guess is that there were casualties among the IRGC officer class than among the grunts. The civilian population was mostly spared. I think the IRGC probably killed more civilians than we did.......In WWII, we routinely bombed civilian population centers. In Vietnam there were also quite a lot of civilian casualties. We nowadays wage kinder, gentler wars. I think it's more than possible that AI will enhance this phenomenon.
Automated Intelligence is competing with Anthropogenic Intelligence? Maybe, baby, a fetus... feature of some form or function.
Ethics is a religion of a moral state of relativity. Case-in-point: the Pro-Choice religion in progressive sects where Abortive Ideation (AI) is entertained with liberal license. We live in interesting times.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.