I haven't fully read all of it, but maybe 30% complete
All in all very balanced take. The things I do really like is he resisted the knee-jerk reaction to "call for govt regulation" and instead sort of admits that governments are pretty much powerless to stop any of this as the companies producing this AI are probably more powerful than most governments.
Instead, he focuses on individual accountability and an exhortation to a shared goal of keeping humanity front and center and not reduced to an assistant to the machine.
This individual accountability extends to creators of AI in the moral sense....if the things you create (and you created without the proper safeguards) are then used for war, murder, etc....then you become morally culpable.
Lastly, which I think is very much needed, is a warning against transhumanist endeavors. That human frailties and limitations are not "problems to be fixed", and humans should not become hybrid constructs with the goal of obsessively trying to remove all possible forms of suffering.
Our relationship with life seems to be in crisis today. Everything that appears as a “limit” — incapacity, illness, old age, suffering, vulnerability — tends to be seen primarily as a defect to be corrected, rather than as a reality through which our humanity matures and opens itself to relationship. And yet we must remember that humanity flourishes not despite limitations, but often through them. The light of faith offers a perspective on reality that helps us recognize what we call the “contingency” of the things of this world. While it is right to strive to alleviate the suffering that marks human life, it is also wise to acknowledge our fundamental finitude, knowing that “religious experience, and in particular Christian faith, propose that we live, without oversimplification, this ambivalence between human greatness and limitation, interpreting it in the light of our original and fundamental relationship with God.”
I haven't fully read all of it, but maybe 30% complete
All in all very balanced take. The things I do really like is he resisted the knee-jerk reaction to "call for govt regulation" and instead sort of admits that governments are pretty much powerless to stop any of this as the companies producing this AI are probably more powerful than most governments.
Instead, he focuses on individual accountability and an exhortation to a shared goal of keeping humanity front and center and not reduced to an assistant to the machine.
This individual accountability extends to creators of AI in the moral sense....if the things you create (and you created without the proper safeguards) are then used for war, murder, etc....then you become morally culpable.
Lastly, which I think is very much needed, is a warning against transhumanist endeavors. That human frailties and limitations are not "problems to be fixed", and humans should not become hybrid constructs with the goal of obsessively trying to remove all possible forms of suffering.