alt Hacker NewsThis kind of prepping is silly. I suppose it's a way for adults to build pillow forts.
AI isn't likely to deliberately kill anyone. It's likely to make them entirely economically uncompetitive.
Today, if people go on strike, the economy grinds to a halt. This gives them a good deal of political power. If the economically useless go on strike, nobody cares.
That leaves violence to make people's voices heard, and the surveillance and police forces that we've been automating should be effective at undermining, dispersal, or suppression.
Automating the economy is the risk to humans, not EMPs.
Replies
[author]
I agree with you that this is silly, and don't recommend it. It looks to me like even in an EMP situation, you don't need a Faraday cage, you just need your equipment to be unplugged: "Overall, I think it's pretty likely that for EMP resistance it's enough to leave your equipment off and unplugged. Unless you're excited about testing Faraday cages, make sure your stuff stays unplugged and you can stop reading now."
On the other hand, I don't think we can rule out a lot of situations in which an EMP might be used, even if none of them involve an AI directly trying to kill people. For example, other countries could conclude that risking nuclear war is a better bet than allowing the US to build superintelligent AI.
Seems easier just to kill the humans, and then not bother with that complicated multi-step process
> Automating the economy is the risk to humans, not EMPs.
A false dilemma, automating the economy can cause (soon to be) disenfranchised people to attack centralized data centers with EMPs.
Security has a cost, ignoring it results in more economical solutions... until eventually the concomitant lapse in security makes it the more costly solution.
Sam Altman claims DRAM shouldn't go to the proles, but into datacenters, but such concentration brings substantial risk to said data centers.
It's harder to attack progress in ML if training were federated throughout the population, so there is no DC to attack. Yes, it appears a bit more inefficient, until it doesn't, thats simply the cost of security.