Sheryl Sandberg, American technology executive, activist, and authorToday’s decision from the Federal Communications Commission to end net neutrality is disappointing and harmful. An open internet is critical for new ideas and economic opportunity – and internet providers shouldn't be able to decide what people can see online or charge more for certain websites. We’re ready to work with members of Congress and others to help make the internet free and open for eve... See More
Alyssa Milano, American actress, singer, producerNet Neutrality protects us from online censorship and our ability to access and send information on the Internet. It prevents ISPs, such as cable and telephone companies (Ajit was legal counsel for Verizon) from preferring certain content, applications, or services from others.
Paul G. Allen, Co-founder of MicrosoftGaining a comprehensive scientific understanding of human cognition is one of the hardest problems there is. We continue to make encouraging progress. But by the end of the century, we believe, we will still be wondering if the singularity is near.
Steven Pinker, Johnstone Family Professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard UniversityThere is not the slightest reason to believe in a coming singularity. The fact that you can visualize a future in your imagination is not evidence that it is likely or even possible. Look at domed cities, jet-pack commuting, underwater cities, mile-high buildings, and nuclear-powered automobiles--all staples of futuristic fantasies when I was a child that have never arrived. Sheer processing power... See More
James Barrat, Filmmaker, speaker and authorAI will have survival drives much like our own. We may be forced to compete with a rival more cunning, more powerful, and more alien than we can imagine
Rodney A. Brooks, Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science, author, and robotics entrepreneurIf we are spectacularly lucky we’ll have AI over the next thirty years with the intentionality of a lizard, and robots using that AI will be useful tools. [...] Worrying about AI that will be intentionally evil to us is pure fear mongering
Roger Schank, John Evans Professor Emeritus of Computer Science, Psychology and Education, Northwestern UniversityMachines cannot think. They are not going to think any time soon. They may increasingly do more interesting things, but the idea that we need to worry about them, regulate them, or grant them civil rights, is just plain silly.
Carlo Rovelli, Theoretical Physicist and AuthorHow close to thinking are the machines we have built, or are going to be built soon? The answer is easy: immensely far. The gap between our best computers and the brain of a child is the gap between a drop of water and the Pacific Ocean. Differences are in performance, structural, functional, and more. Any maundering about how to deal with thinking machines is totally premature to say the least.
Enrique Dans, Professor of Innovation at IE Business School and bloggerUtopia? Not at all. We need to advance the discussion and make politicians understand that it is the only way forward. And if we don’t move forward, we’re going to end up in a place none of us is going to like.
Bob Inglis, Former CongressmanYou then offset that [carbon tax] with a reduction in payroll taxes, dollar for dollar. And that's why I was so flexible. It's a tax swap, that's what I was talking about. It wouldn't grow the government, and it would approximate the attachment of these negative externalities to combustion fossil fuels.
Branko Milanovic, Economist. Development and inequality expert.Economically, states already guarantee a basic salary under certain conditions, for example in cases of unemployment or extreme poverty. With universal basic income, this assistance would no longer be temporary or linked to a certain condition, and I don’t think it would be sustainable. Moreover, I don’t like the idea of a world where work is no longer a form of self-realisation for citizens. I im... See More
Stanford University, Stanford University ReportContrary to the more fantastic predictions for AI in the popular press, the Study Panel found no cause for concern that AI is an imminent threat to humankind. No machines with self-sustaining long-term goals and intent have been developed, nor are they likely to be developed in the near future.
Steve Wozniak, Co-Founder of Apple Inc, inventor of the personal computerIt's actually going to turn out really good for humans. And it will be hundreds of years down the stream before they'd even have the ability. They'll be so smart by then that they'll know they have to keep nature, and humans are part of nature. So I got over my fear that we'd be replaced by computers. They're going to help us. We're at least the gods originally.
Sam Altman, President of Y Combinator. Investor at Reddit, Stripe, Change.org, Pinterest and many othersI think it’s good to start studying [basic income] early. I’m fairly confident that at some point in the future, as technology continues to eliminate traditional jobs and massive new wealth gets created, we’re going to see some version of this at a national scale.
Yann LeCun, Computer scientist working in machine learning and computer visionThere are several real or imagined dangers about AI. Today, the danger of a Terminator scenario or something like this... those are not things that we’re worried about because we just don’t have the technology to build machines like that.
Bill Gates, Philanthropist. Founder and former CEO of Microsoft.The push is the R&D, the pull is the carbon tax. Yes, the government will be somewhat inept, but the private sector is in general inept. How many companies do venture capitalists invest in that go poorly? By far most of them.
Mark Zuckerberg, CEO at FacebookI have pretty strong opinions on this. I am optimistic. I think you can build things and the world gets better. But with AI especially, I am really optimistic. I think people who are naysayers and try to drum up these doomsday scenarios — I just, I don't understand it. It's really negative and in some ways I actually think it is pretty irresponsible
Sam Altman, President of Y Combinator. Investor at Reddit, Stripe, Change.org, Pinterest and many othersDevelopment of superhuman machine intelligence is probably the greatest threat to the continued existence of humanity.
Anke Hassel, Sociologist. Professor at the Hertie School of Governance. Director of Hans Böckler Foundation’s WSIThe basic income will further divide society and prevent social mobility. Those who, due to their family background, have good prospects for interesting employment and high income will maintain their existing work ethic, engaging in school and study, and maybe taking a sabbatical or two in between. This is a good thing. However, life will become more difficult for young people from parts of societ... See More
Bostrom and Yudkowsky’s arguments for existential risk have some logical foundation, but are often presented in an exaggerated way
Clive Sinclair, Entrepreneur and inventorOnce you start to make machines that are rivaling and surpassing humans with intelligence, it’s going to be very dificult for us to survive
Ray Kurzweil, Author, computer scientist, inventor and futuristThe existential threat from genetic technologies is already here: the same technology that will soon make major strides against cancer, heart disease, and other diseases could also be employed by a bioterrorist to create a bioengineered biological virus that combines ease of transmission, deadliness, and stealthiness, that is, a long incubation period. The tools and knowledge to do this are far mo... See More
World Economic Forum, World Economic Forum ReportSome serious thinkers fear that AI could one day pose an existential threat: a ‘superintelligence’ might pursue goals that prove not to be aligned with the continued existence of humankind
William Poundstone, JournalistThere is going to be interest in creating machines with will, whose interests are not our own. And that's without considering what machines that terrorists, rogue regimes, and intelligence agencies of the less roguish nations, may devise. I think the notion of Frankensteinian AI, which turns on its creators, is something worth taking seriously
Frank Wilczek, Physicist, MIT and Recipient, 2004 Nobel Prize in PhysicsWithout careful restraint and tact, researchers could wake up to discover they've enabled the creation of armies of powerful, clever, vicious paranoiacs
Filter by occupation/university by clicking on the pies: