Disaster Professor: Total Surveillance Is the Only Way to Save Humanity - The author of "The Simulation Argument" says one bad technology could destroy humanity — and the only way to prevent it is an AI overlord.


The Oxford philosopher who posited 15 years ago that we might be living in a computer simulation has another far-out theory, this time about humanity’s future — and it’s not exactly optimistic.

On Wednesday, Nick Bostrom took the stage at a TED conference in Vancouver, Canada, to share some of the insights from his latest work, “The Vulnerable World Hypothesis.”

In the paper, Bostrom argues that mass government surveillance will be necessary to prevent a technology of our own creation from destroying humanity — a radically dystopian idea from one of this generation’s preeminent philosophers.


Black Balls
Bostrom frames his argument in terms of a giant urn filled with balls. Each ball represents a different idea or possible technology, and they are different colors: white (beneficial), gray (moderately harmful), or black (civilization-destroying).

Humanity is constantly pulling balls from this urn, according to Bostom’s model — and thankfully, no one has pulled out a black ball yet. Big emphasis on “yet.”

“If scientific and technological research continues,” Bostrom writes, “we will eventually reach it and pull it out.”


Dystopian AF
To prevent this from happening, Bostrom says we need a more effective global government — one that could quickly outlaw any potential civilization-destroying technology.

He also suggests we lean into mass government surveillance, outfitting every person with necklace-like “freedom tags” that can hear and see what they’re doing at all times.

These tags would feed into “patriot monitoring stations,” or “freedom centers,” where artificial intelligences monitor the data, bringing human “freedom officers” into the loop if they detect signs of a black ball.


Two Evils
We’ve already seen people abuse mass surveillance systems, and those systems are far less exhaustive than the kind Bostrom is proposing.

Still, if it’s a choice between having someone watching our every move or, you know, the end of civilization, Bostrom seems to think the former is a better option than the latter.

“Obviously there are huge downsides and indeed massive risks to mass surveillance and global governance,” he told the crowd at the TED conference, according to Inverse. “I’m just pointing out that if we are lucky, the world could be such that these would be the only way you could survive a black ball.”
 
An all-encompassing, privacy-shattering system capable of bringing to reality an unprecedented level of oppression would destroy society as we know it, anyways. What would even be the point of instituting a "black ball" to prevent the emergence of a "black ball?" An omnipotent government is never going to be benevolent; stop pretending that it will be.
 
Last edited:
"The only way to keep humanity from having another Hitler is to create our own mega Hitler".
An all-encompassing, privacy-shattering system capable of bringing to reality an unprecedented level of oppression would destroy society as we know it, anyways. What would even be the point of instituting a "black ball" to prevent the emergence of a "black ball?"
To not destroy the World we need to destroy the World.
 
Black Balls
Bostrom frames his argument in terms of a giant urn filled with balls. Each ball represents a different idea or possible technology, and they are different colors: white (beneficial), gray (moderately harmful), or black (civilization-destroying).

Humanity is constantly pulling balls from this urn, according to Bostom’s model — and thankfully, no one has pulled out a black ball yet. Big emphasis on “yet.”

“If scientific and technological research continues,” Bostrom writes, “we will eventually reach it and pull it out.”
so nukes and nerve gas and tinder were never invented according to this absolute fucking genius
 
To not destroy the World we need to destroy the World.
734343
 
In other words, we must control what people think and do, for their own safety and for the greater good.

Not exactly a new idea, though it is increasingly frightening, with the way surveillance technology is advancing.

The good professor should move to China, they're pioneering exactly what he's describing.

A supposed intellectual that gives TED talks on why Orwellian societies are the way forward, and how we should use technology to pursue thought crime. I wonder if he has considered that maybe his solution is, in fact, the "black ball" he's so afraid of.
 
He also suggests we lean into mass government surveillance, outfitting every person with necklace-like “freedom tags” that can hear and see what they’re doing at all times.

These tags would feed into “patriot monitoring stations,” or “freedom centers,” where artificial intelligences monitor the data, bringing human “freedom officers” into the loop if they detect signs of a black ball.


I can't help but feel like this is some kind of joke.
 
Back