Most AI researchers say superhuman AI poses a non-trivial risk of our extinction. Plus: Zapping the brain helps to induce hypnosis. |
|
|
Like what you see? Subscribe today to gain unlimited access to all our subscriber only content. |
|
|
Stephen Taylor / Alamy Stock Photo |
|
|
Many artificial intelligence researchers see the possible future development of superhuman AI as having a non-trivial chance of causing our extinction, but there is also widespread disagreement and uncertainty about such risks. This comes from a survey of 2700 AI researchers who recently published work at six of the top conferences on artificial intelligence. The survey asked the researchers to share their thoughts on possible timelines for future AI technological milestones, as well as the good or bad societal consequences of those achievements. Almost 58 per cent said they considered there is a 5 per cent chance of human extinction or other extremely bad AI-related outcomes. Read more
|
|
|
Sending electrical pulses to a specific part of the brain makes people more susceptible to hypnosis. Forty people with the chronic pain condition fibromyalgia received transcranial magnetic stimulation to their dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, while an additional 40 people with the same condition had a sham treatment. After just one 1.5-minute session, those who received the electrical brain stimulation had a boost in their hypnosis susceptibility for up to an hour, while the other group saw no change. Hypnotherapy has shown some promise for treating conditions such as chronic pain, but the researchers didn’t measure if the participants’ fibromyalgia symptoms improved. Read more
|
|
|
New Scientist subscriptions |
|
|
| The breathtaking advances in artificial intelligence and a growing urgency to find climate change solutions are set to dominate headlines in 2024. Stay ahead with New Scientist for just $1.50 a week and let us guide you through the coming year.
|
|
|
Comment: The possibilities in our future |
|
|
We know our sun will shine for another 6 billion years before its nuclear fuel runs out. And the expanding universe will continue, perhaps forever, destined to become ever colder, ever emptier. But despite our awareness of the aeons to come, our planning horizons have shrunk because our lives are changing so fast, writes astronomer royal Martin Rees. The political focus is on the urgent and immediate. Perhaps our remote descendants will have a much-enhanced lifespan. They might even become near-immortal. Would they, like us, “spend and save” time as a scarce resource? Or would an overabundance lead to ennui? Only time itself can tell. Read more
|
|
|
|
Get all 5 of our Essential Guides publishing in 2024 delivered direct to your door. This year, our need-to-know compendiums will cover the dawn of civilisation, space exploration, artificial intelligence and much more. |
|
|
“It’s like driving on a gravel road versus driving on a freeway.” |
|
|
This email has been sent to subscriber@example.com. Unsubscribe from the Daily newsletter |
Do not reply directly to this email. If you have an enquiry, please contact us using the relevant contact details listed here. |
Copyright © New Scientist Ltd Registered Office: Northcliffe House, 2 Derry Street, London, W8 5TT Registered in England. No.10644366 Australian mailing address: PO Box 2315, Strawberry Hills, NSW 2012, Australia Registered in Australia. ABN 22 621 413 170
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions |
|
|
|
|
|
|