"he warned it could trigger a large-scale incident this year or next, such as a temporary blackout of financial or power systems."

I know this sounds unusual, but I do think this wouldn't be the worst thing that could happen. Sure, it would cause a bit of chaos, but it might also make us think twice about continuing down our current path of unfettered development, and possibly even make us much more cautious, which might in turn even help us with the climate crisis.

Because human beings in a large mass only respond to one thing: immediate difficulty. They don't respond to delayed difficulty like "the climate is getting worse" or "technology will make life more difficult in the distant future". They only respond to immediate pain.

So I think it would be a good thing if the financial system had a serious threat. Then people with money, who tend to offset future problems with technical solutions and financial padding, would start to become much more suspicious of technology and defund AI and wasteful things that are likely to threaten their safety.

▲

goda90 25 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Don't ignore the very real human cost this would bring. Every day the power is out, more vulnerable people would be harmed(including death) directly from not having electricity for essentials or from systemic failures like in food distribution and storage. Financial systems being down could also have extreme impacts on some people, but maybe easier to mitigate via human compassion.

Maybe the long term changes such blackouts would cause would be "worth it" in a utilitarian sense, but let's not hope for such damage.

▲

seviu 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We are starting to get a taste. Credit Mutuel Arkea just admitted having been hacked. Over 100 millions gone.

Blockchain despite all its flaws, is the canary in the coal mine. They have been dealing with an increasing amount of cyberattacks. Because it all happens publicly in the blockchain, there is no way to hide it.

However major bank gets hacked in the tune of over 100 millions and we get to know it happened because somebody who has no relationship to the hack turned his eyes to a bunch of suspicious transactions happening on Ethereum.

	▲	RetroTechie 16 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If people's pensions & life savings are flushed out the back door (literally), rest assured attention WILL be paid.
	▲	hoppp an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Blockchain dapps were getting hacked long before AI. Not a signal

▲

Oras 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You’re describing a weapon, and if AI managed to do that (I believe we are not far away), then this would probably increase the investment not decrease it.

▲

bemtevi an hour ago | parent [-]

Would it? I don't think so. Not if the weapon is an indiscriminate one and makes everyone worse off. Yes, some people (maybe military generals) might support it. But there would be near universal hatred for it, if people wake up one day and find their bank accounts not working or their eletricity not working.

This is why I think AI is so stupid. It's just too powerful for anyone to control, especially with the inertial mass of capitalistic society powering it through the incremental, short-term advantages it gives.

▲

zombot an hour ago | parent [-]

> Not if the weapon is an indiscriminate one and makes everyone worse off.

Nuclear weapons are indiscriminate and make everyone worse off if used. And everybody has them. Your optimism is unfounded.

▲

bemtevi an hour ago | parent [-]

> Nuclear weapons are indiscriminate and make everyone worse off if used.

The difference is most people have not experienced any immediate effects of nuclear weapons. But people will experience the immediate effects of AI taking down the electricity grid, for instance.

	▲	zombot a minute ago \| parent [-]
		"most people" are in the set of things the trillionaires don't give a shit about. Their market distortion has already made PCs unaffordable and electricity prices rise, among other adverse effects. What else has to happen so you take notice?

▲

_heimdall 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I agree that people only really respond when something goes wrong badly enough that its impossible to ignore.

I disagree that something like this would be a good thing though. Whether it's a power outage, financial crisis, or something else people will die. If that's what happens and society ends up adjusting course after then that's what happens, but I can't call people dying a good thing.

	▲	graemep 44 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It would be a lesser evil rather than good. This sort of thing was going to happen, with or without AI (state sponsored hackers, the US or China taking down systems they control, or whatever). The later it happens, the more we will be down the path that lets it happen, and the worse the consequences. We are getting gradually worse consequences: AWS outages taking down websites, GCP outages taking down banks, attacks on fridges disrupting good supplies... Its better for us to change path when something happens that causes dozens of people die rather than wait until its millions.
	▲	bemtevi 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> people will die. I don't think that's a good thing. But if we DON'T do anything, then even more poeple are likely to suffer. So while people dying is not a good thing, a thousand people dying is better than a million people dying because we don't do anything. Same thing about burning your hand. It's not a good thing to burn your hand, but burning your hand once when you're young probably saves you from a more serious accident later on.